Confusing statement about DNS name tree

[catern]

In the "DNS names" section in basic.md, this sentence occurs:

This for example means that if there is a name called 'ns1.ord.ietf.org' and a query comes in for 'ns2.fra.ietf.org', that name exists - even though no records may be assigned to it.

This doesn't make much sense in the context of the immediately previous graphic, which shows a graphical representation of "www.ietf.org". It seems like the intention might be to say something like:

This for example means that if there is a name called 'www.ietf.org' and a query comes in for 'ietf.org', that name exists - even though no records may be assigned to it.

If that's not the intention, perhaps the section can be clarified. If the original wording is correct, then it's not clear what "exist" means, since it seems to say that absolutely every name "exists", not just sub-trees of names for which there are records.

[auerswal]

This sentence has me confused as well. I do not see any reason why the existence of ns1.ord.ietf.org. should cause ns2.fra.ietf.org. to exist as well.

The sentence seems to imply that a name exists in the DNS because a query for the name has been created. Which seems completely wrong.