Following on this question about how to characterise Spinors mathematically:
First, given a universal cover $\pi:G' \rightarrow G$ of a lie group $G$, is it correct to say we can always lift representations of $G$ to those of $G'$ essentially by pre-composition by $\pi$? (presumably, modulo questions about the exact smooth structure of the space $End (V)$ for a representation $V$ of $G$).
Secondly, there are representations of $G'$ that do not descend to $G$.
Is it fair to call these Spinor representations, since when $G$ is the connected component of the identity of $SO(p,q)$, its universal cover is the double cover $Spin(p,q)$?
Yes, yes, and yes.
In more detail: issues about smooth vectors are much subordinate in any case, and prove trivial, so (smooth-vector?) repns of the "lower" group "lift" to the covering group. Not at all a problem.
Yes, at least as evidenced by many examples, about half the finite-dimensional repns of spin groups do not descend to the corresponding orthogonal groups, for example. Some other classical groups happen to be simply-connected, in contrast.
And, yes, to the last question, as a matter of usage or convention or tradition.
The underlying point-of-interest is that it is not obvious that the universal covering of all these not-simply-connected Lie groups is just a two-fold-cover. Weyl found this.