I'm studying the book "Riemannian Geometry" by Petersen and since I'm new to the subject, I'm helping myself also with the more introductory DoCarmos's book. I'm a bit confused about the definition of tensor. The definition given by DoCarmo is the following.
Given a Riemannian manifold M, a tensor $T$ of order $r$ is a multilinear map $$ T: \underbrace{\mathcal{X}(M) \times \dots \times \mathcal{X}(M)}_{r \text{ times}} \to \mathcal{D}(M)$$ where $\mathcal{X}(M) $ is the set of all the smooth vector fields over $M$ and $\mathcal{D}(M)$ is the set of all the smooth functions on $M$.
But Petersen's book talks about $(q, r)$-tensors and I guessed from the context that that for him a $(q, r)$-tensor is a multilinear map
$$ T: \underbrace{\mathcal{X}(M) \times \dots \times \mathcal{X}(M)}_{r \text{ times}} \to \underbrace{\mathcal{X}(M) \times \dots \times \mathcal{X}(M)}_{q \text{ times}}$$.
Then I took a look also to John Lee's book and I found this definition.
A $r$-covariant and $q$-contravariant tensor on a real vector space $V$ is a multilinear map $$T: \underbrace{V^* \times \dots \times V^*}_{q \text{times}} \times \underbrace{V \times \dots \times V} \to \mathbb{R}. $$
Then he extend the definition to manifolds considering smooth sections of tensor bundles.
What is the differences between these approaches? Could someone explain me better how Petersen sees tensors?