Errrm - as I understand it, UCDs are *never* uniquely resolvable. ie,
even if there is a unique UCD in one table, it doesn't necessarily mean
it has the same meaning as a column with the same UCD in another table.
That means we need to get user confirmation at every stage where we map between UCDs and table columns at the moment, and wherever we specify an actual applied query, it needs to be resolved to actual table column names.
Tony Linde wrote:
> I think it is essential that ADQL support the use of *both* UCDs and column > names. It'll be up to the query interface to substitute column names (by > asking the user probably) where UCDs are not uniquely resolvable. > > Cheers, > Tony. > >