Hmm, that can't be true, since [itex]e_3 = (0, 0, 1)[/itex] in the standard basis. Remember we are going to rotate this vector counterclockwise in the yz-plane, so its image after the transformation will be a different vector. Just to make sure we're on the same page, the standard basis is [itex]e_1 = (1, 0, 0), e_2 = (0, 1, 0),[/itex] and [itex]e_3 = (0, 0, 1)[/itex].
Now, the first attached image is meant to be a viewpoint where the positive x-axis, and thus [itex]e_1[/itex], is pointing out of the page. So we cannot see the x-axis from this viewpoint: it is directly above the origin of the yz-plane. The positive z-axis, and thus [itex]e_3 = (0, 0, 1)[/itex] points right, while the positive y-axis, and thus [itex]e_2 = (0, 1, 0)[/itex] points up. The diagram shows the counterclockwise direction of the rotation by 90 degrees and its magnitude.
The second illustration shows that when we rotate [itex]e_3[/itex] counterclockwise by 90 degrees in this plane, it coincides with [itex]e_2[/itex]. So the components of the new vector [itex]T(e_3)[/itex] are (0, 1, 0). Does that make sense so far?