Suggestion for a Copernican Revolution for localizations

I’m an Italian keen user of Scrivener (in Windows systems) and, thanks God, I speak enough English to enjoy using it and to take advantage of the huge amount of support and documentation of it, including this forum.
I read in the “Scrivener in Spanish” topic ([url]https://forum.literatureandlatte.com/t/scrivener-in-spanish/23166/1]) how expensive and heavy is the activity of localizing Scrivener.
I use a PIM software - EPIM, developed by an Estonian Company -that adopts in localization a very cool solution, in my opinion.
The developers put all the writings of all the buttons, labels, messages etc. in a plain text list.
Something like:
00001 Save
00002 Preview
00003 Submit
00004 Disable BBCode
00005 …

And there are lists for many languages, in which the numbers of identification of the labels remain the same and the words are in the appropriate language.
The program set to a given language loads in memory the correspondent list and every time it has to display a page it picks up the writings correspondent to the code numbers and displays them in the planned places in the windows.

Even if there could be thousands of words in a table, the maintenance and update can be performed very rapidly and simply.
Even a not skilled users can make a table with writings in a great deal of languages by himself.
Personally I customized some labels and writings at their taste

I don’t know about Windows, but on the Mac localization already uses a very similar sort of system. The difficulty and expense involved in localizing an application consists in finding and hiring a skilled translator to do the job.

Localisation is pretty straightforward on the Windows version, and works in a way not dis-similar to the one described. But jstovell is correct: Technical ease or difficulty aside, the real challenge is in getting a skilled translator to make the translation.

It’s not just about using a dictionary translation. The localisation has to have an understanding of the concepts and metaphors inherent in the user interface and provide a revised nomenclature than only has a perfect internal consistency but which also takes into account the established convention on similar software in that language.

It’s a pain, in other words.