The reviewer questions whether our guidance on validation when `meta.profile` is absent is appropriate. In response, we have reviewed the language of section 10.2 (Profile-Level Conformance Expectations) and believe that it is both correct and clear. In particular, we give contingencies for the data receiver, if `meta.profile` is missing: 1) The data receiver may examine the instance contents to try and associate it with a profile. Often, there is an identifying code or category that can be used to associate an instance with a profile. 2) As a last resort, the data receiver may have to iterate through its supported profiles for that resource, to find a profile that the resource validates against. We believe the description is both accurate and clear, and does not need to be revised.