It's super interesting that you have this definition given your authorship of django (I mean, actually interesting, not 'interesting' :-)

In another comment I used the example of rails as a kind of canonical 'framework' that can potentially do everything for you full stack, and django is in the same category, juxtaposed against something like React that cannot.

To that, I think your last paragraph is the one I agree with most closely. It's true, but only for the view part of the app, right? I think that's where I get stuck on stretching to calling it a framework.

I guess I can see it if you're defining your view/client as a separate logical entity from the rest of the stack. Which is totally reasonable. But I guess just not how I think about it.