It's rather unconventional, so it took me a while to be certain what you meant.

I was just giving my interpretation of the article's definitions. Do you think my interpretation is unconventional?

I don't think I disagree with you about how to parse mind-dependent, I've just been sloppy in putting it into a definition. I would call both tablet A and tablet B objective/mind independent

So how about this for a definition of mind-dependent:

The "source" of what is moral for an agent depends on the mind of the agent.