I’m very comfortable that if I look at a map or chart published by a publisher approved for the purposes of CAR 233(1)(h), and there is a symbol on that map or chart, and the legend for that map or chart calls that symbol an “aerodrome” of some kind, I can very safely assume that the position of that location in the real world fits the description: “an aerodrome depicted on aeronautical charts” in terms of the rule you quoted.
Sure, that's obvious. (With the possible exception of places like Lake Bolac.) As long as approval for CAR 233(1)(h) forbids them from showing any airfield not shown on the official charts (whichever charts they may be) and you can't create user defined points that are shown as airfields.
However the important thing is not whether or not it is on the chart, it is whether everyone
agrees whether it is on the chart and is therefore on the same frequency.
Are you comfortable that everybody else using the airfield knows it is on your chart?
Are you comfortable that when your chart does NOT show an aerodrome, that there is no other chart that does show an aerodrome at that location?
There are aerodromes shown on the VNC not on the WAC and vice-versa, which is why I keep saying we now have to check every chart and there is a danger that people in the same location are on different frequencies.
What about places where the the aerodrome is marked with an ultralight or hang gliding symbol but no aerodrome symbol? I suspect these locations typicallly use 126.7, and DO have significant traffic. Is someone going to tell them they should be on area? Or does an ultralight symbol count as an aerodrome marked on a chart?