Though keeping the name for the sake of tradition, for the past 30 years most scholars on the subject have let go of the "revolution-narrative" in favor of a more nuanced picture which mentions the support for the revolution within Britain, but also mentions the invasion of Britain by a Dutch army.

I suppose the reason why it has been called a revolution instead of an invasion has to do with post-event politics. William of Orange wanted his take over to succeed and if that meant pretending he was merely a part of an internal revolution instead of the face and mastermind of a foreign invasion by England's archenemy ... then so be it.

In a way it's quite similar to modern German historiography about the Second World War. It never talks about German towns being conquered in the spring of 1945 ... it nearly always uses 'liberated'. In the same way, Germany wasn't 'invaded by the Allies' ... but ' freed from the Nazis'.