In Furstenberg's proof of the multiple recurrence theorem in ergodic theory, one makes use of the concept of compact and weak mixing extensions of a measure preserving system. The following definition is taken from the book Ergodic Theory with a view toward Number Theory by Ward:
Definition 1 (Weak mixing extension): An extension $(X, \mathcal B_X, \mu, T) \to (Y, \mathcal B_Y, \nu, S)$ of measure preserving systems is said to be be relatively weak mixing if the system $(X \times X, \mu \times_Y \mu, T \times T)$ is ergodic, where $\mu \times_Y \mu$ is the relatively independent joining over $Y$ (see, e.g. here for a definition).
The motivation given for the definition is that whenever $Y$ is trivial, that is, measurably isomorphic to a one point space, then the relatively independent joining over $Y$ reduces to the product measure, and hence the extension $X \to Y$ is relatively weak mixing if and only if $X$ is weak mixing in the classical sense.
While the definition is in a very useful form, as evidenced by its use in the proof, it is not immediately intuitive to me. Naively, I would expect relative weak mixing to look something like the following (in analogy to relative independence in probability theory):
Definition 2 (Weak mixing extension?): An extension $(X, \mathcal B_X, \mu, T) \to (Y, \mathcal B_Y, \nu, S)$ of measure preserving systems is said to be be relatively weak mixing if the system $(X, \mathcal B_X, \mu_y^Y, T)$ is classically weak mixing for $\nu$-a.e. $y \in Y$, where $\mu_y^Y$ are the conditional measures of $\mu$ given $Y$.
Hence the above naive definition just asks for $X$ to be weak mixing above every fibre of $Y$.
Question: Are definitions 1 and 2 equivalent? If not, is there any equivalent formulation of relative weak mixing that is more immediately intuitive? Ideally I would like something that works directly with the conditional measures/disintegration over $Y$, instead of transferring to the $L^2$ setting.
I seek also a similar (equivalent) reformulation of compact extensions to a potentially less tractable/useful but more immediately intuitive form. The definition, also given in Ward is:
Definition 3 (Compact extension): An extension $(X, \mathcal B_X, \mu, T) \to (Y, \mathcal B_Y, \nu, S)$ of measure preserving systems is said to be be relatively compact if the set of functions satisfying the following almost periodic property is dense in $L^2_\mu (X)$.
A function $f \in L^2_\mu (X)$ is said to be almost periodic with respect to $Y$ if every $\varepsilon > 0$, there exist functions $g_1, \dots, g_r \in L_\mu^2 (X)$ such that
$$\min_{s = 1, \dots, r} \|T^n f - g_s\|_{L^2_{\mu^Y_y}} < \varepsilon$$
for all $n \geq 1$ and for $\nu$-almost every $y \in Y$.
Again I would prefer a definition that works directly with the measures instead of function space.
Thanks in advance!