The map in question appears to resemble (as far the division of control goes) the ISW map:
So the (light) blue area appears to correspond to "reported Israeli clearing operations" and "claimed furthest Israeli advances" combined. (Not that these terms are explained much beyond that there.)
And if you wanted to know more
For media inquiries, please email [email protected] .
OTOH, I suspect they are using Gallant's terms there. On Nov 16, ToI paraphrased that he said
the IDF has completed the capture of the western part of Gaza City, and cleared the area of any Hamas operatives and assets.
Which more or less corresponds to that map. FWTW, the same terminology appears in the NYT:
U.S. military officials said their Israeli counterparts tell them to expect more weeks of clearing operations in the north before Israel prepares a separate initiative in southern Gaza, widening the offensive.
And although the Israeli defense minister, Yoav Gallant, said in a video statement on Monday that Israel had “accelerated our activities against the tunnels” and that Hamas militants had lost control in the north and were fleeing south, military analysts said Mr. Gallant’s statements raised many questions.
Anyhow, Reuters appears to make the same distinction, and more or less use the same map, albeit they zoom in on the recent hospital action:
CBC actually endeavoured to explain the military jargon related to that map:
Clearing operation is a mission that "removes all enemy forces and eliminate[s] organized resistance within an assigned area," according to the U.S. military.
As for the "furthest advances" that probably refers to where there is more active combat. I don't know where the IDF communicated those areas, exactly, or how the ISW assessed that part.
Also interesting from the US military manuals though. Right after defining the 'clear' mission task they define:
Control is a tactical mission task that requires the commander to maintain physical influence
over a specified area to prevent its use by an enemy or to create conditions necessary for successful
friendly operations. That influence can result from friendly forces occupying the specified area or
dominating that area by their weapon systems. Control of an area does not require the complete clearance
of all enemy soldiers from the specified area.
Which is probably why Wikipedia combined those two shades of blue and just called them 'control'.
FWTW, also interesting point later on in that military manual:
A unit can control an area without occupying it, but not vice versa. That is the difference between the tactical
mission tasks of occupy and control.