| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - From the context of the question and answer, particularly the immediately preceding question and answer, the sense of plaintiff's response seems clearly to be that plaintiff had no direct evidence, or as is sometimes said, ocular proof, or as it was put in counsel's earlier question, no proof positive of the fact that the meat he was eating came from GMSC. Such proof would not, of course, be req
|
