--- a/reports/prov-implementations.html	Tue Feb 12 08:44:06 2013 +0000
+++ b/reports/prov-implementations.html	Tue Feb 12 11:23:08 2013 +0100
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-In terms of implementation pairs, Section <a href="#prov-exchange">4</a> enumerates which pairs of implementations report exchanging provenance. Here, we meet the exit criteria in that each feature is exchanged by two implementations. For PROV-O, the implementations are from two separate institutions. For PROV-N, there are implementations in different programming languages from the same institution which exchange all constructs and an implementation from a different institution that exchanges some constructs. We believe, however, that this meets the goals of the exit criteria to demonstrate interoperability. 
+In terms of implementation pairs, Section <a href="#prov-exchange">4</a> enumerates which pairs of implementations report exchanging provenance. Here, we meet the exit criteria in that each feature is exchanged by at least two implementations. For PROV-O, the implementations are from three separate institutions. For PROV-N, there are implementations in different programming languages from the same institution which exchange all constructs and an implementation from a different institution that exchanges some constructs. We believe that this meets the goals of the exit criteria to demonstrate interoperability. 
 </p>
 
 Finally, three validators have implemented all of the constraints defined in PROV-Constraints passing the requisite test cases, thus, passing the exit criteria. The implementations are in Java, Prolog and SPARQL.