Hi, In the current specification, the tool attribute is free text, the 1.0 spec says that it "is used to specify the signature and version of the tool that created or modified the document". However, this mechanism is a bit loose and open to mis-use. For example, a tool may omit the version number. Including tool-name and tool-version attributes in the next version would be a better solution. Regarding a tools registry, I don't think we could limit the names to a standard list. The hope is that as many tools as possible will use this xliff format. Is it necessary to have a naming convention for tool names? A convention is too easy to ignore, I think the best solution may be to introduce another attribute, tool-company. This way a tool can be clearly defined as tool-company = ACME tool-name = Killer App tool-version = 4.0 and not in a confusing manner such as tool = ACME Killer or tool = ACME Ltd. Killer 4 or tool = ACME, Killer App or tool = ACME Ltd., Killer App 4.0 I will write this up in more detail and propose these additions to the TC for the next release of xliff. Enda