P.S. Free 2025 Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations dumps are available on Google Drive shared by Itcerttest: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_BBQIfhTyoIyCmoRsS4N3pcZhPccWJJA
Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations certification exam will definitely lead you to a better career prospects. Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations exam can not only validate your skills but also prove your expertise. Itcerttest's Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations exam training materials is a proven software. With it you will get better theory than ever before. Before you decide to buy, you can try a free trial version, so that you will know the quality of the Itcerttest's Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations Exam Training materials. It will be your best choice.
We are pleased to inform you that we have engaged in this business for over ten years with our Workday Pro Integrations Certification Exam Workday-Pro-Integrations exam questions. Because of our experience, we are well qualified to take care of your worried about the Workday-Pro-Integrations Preparation exam and smooth your process with successful passing results.
>> Workday-Pro-Integrations Testking Learning Materials <<
In the era of informational globalization, the world has witnessed climax of science and technology development, and has enjoyed the prosperity of various scientific blooms. In 21st century, every country had entered the period of talent competition, therefore, we must begin to extend our Workday-Pro-Integrations personal skills, only by this can we become the pioneer among our competitors. At the same time, our competitors are trying to capture every opportunity and get a satisfying job. In this case, we need a professional Workday-Pro-Integrations Certification, which will help us stand out of the crowd and knock out the door of great company.
NEW QUESTION # 31
Refer to the following scenario to answer the question below.
You have configured a Core Connector: Worker integration, which utilizes the following basic configuration:
* Integration field attributes are configured to output the Position Title and Business Title fields from the Position Data section.
* Integration Population Eligibility uses the field Is Manager which returns true if the worker holds a manager role.
* Transaction Log service has been configured to Subscribe to specific Transaction Types: Position Edit Event.
You launch your integration with the following date launch parameters (Date format of MM/DD/YYYY):
* As of Entry Moment: 05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM
* Effective Date: 05/25/2024
* Last Successful As of Entry Moment: 05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM
* Last Successful Effective Date: 05/23/2024
To test your integration, you made a change to a worker named Jeff Gordon who is not assigned to the manager role. You perform an Edit Position on Jeff Gordon and update their business title to a new value. Jeff Gordon's worker history shows the Edit Position Event as being successfully completed with an effective date of 05/24/2024 and an Entry Moment of 05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM however Jeff Gordon does not show up in your output.
What configuration element would have to be modified for the integration to include Jeff Gordon in the output?
Answer: D
Explanation:
The scenario describes a Core Connector: Worker integration with specific configurations, and a test case where Jeff Gordon's data doesn't appear in the output despite an Edit Position event. Let's analyze why Jeff Gordon is excluded and what needs to change:
* Current Configuration:
* Integration Field Attributes: Outputs Position Title and Business Title from Position Data.
* Integration Population Eligibility: Filters workers where "Is Manager" = True (only managers).
* Transaction Log Service: Subscribes to "Position Edit Event" transactions.
* Launch Parameters:
* As of Entry Moment: 05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM
* Effective Date: 05/25/2024
* Last Successful As of Entry Moment: 05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM
* Last Successful Effective Date: 05/23/2024
* Test Case:
* Worker: Jeff Gordon (not a manager).
* Action: Edit Position, updating Business Title.
* Event Details: Effective Date 05/24/2024, Entry Moment 05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM.
* Result: Jeff Gordon does not appear in the output.
* Analysis:
* Date Parameters: The integration captures changes between the Last Successful As of Entry Moment (05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM) and the current As of Entry Moment (05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM). Jeff's Edit Position event (Entry Moment 05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM) falls within this range, and its Effective Date (05/24/2024) is before the integration's Effective Date (05/25/2024), making it eligible from a date perspective.
* Transaction Log: Subscribed to "Position Edit Event," which matches Jeff's action (Edit Position), so the event type is correctly captured.
* Field Attributes: Outputs Position Title and Business Title, and Jeff's update to Business Title aligns with these fields.
* Population Eligibility: Filters for "Is Manager" = True. Jeff Gordon is explicitly noted as "not assigned to the manager role," meaning "Is Manager" = False for him. This filter excludes Jeff from the population, regardless of the event or date eligibility.
* Why Jeff is Excluded:TheIntegration Population Eligibilityrestriction ("Is Manager" = True) prevents Jeff Gordon from being included, as he isn't a manager. This filter applies to the entire worker population before events or fields are considered, overriding other conditions.
* Option Analysis:
* A. Transaction Log Subscription: Incorrect. The subscription already includes "Position Edit Event," which matches Jeff's action. Modifying this wouldn't address the population filter.
* B. Integration Population Eligibility: Correct. Changing this to include non-managers (e.g., removing the "Is Manager" = True filter or adjusting it to include all employees) would allow Jeff Gordon to appear in the output.
* C. Date Launch Parameters: Incorrect. Jeff's event (05/24/2024) falls within the date range, so the parameters are not the issue.
* D. Integration Field Attributes: Incorrect. The attributes already include Business Title, which Jeff updated, so this configuration is irrelevant to his exclusion.
* Modification Needed:Adjust theIntegration Population Eligibilityto either:
* Remove the "Is Manager" = True filter to include all workers, or
* Modify it to align with the scenario's intent (e.g., "Worker Type equals Employee") if managers were an unintended restriction.
* Implementation:
* Edit the Core Connector: Worker integration.
* Use the related actionConfigure Integration Population Eligibility.
* Remove or adjust the "Is Manager" = True condition.
* Relaunch the integration and verify Jeff Gordon appears in the output.
References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:
* Core Connectors & Document Transformation: Section on "Configuring Integration Population Eligibility" explains how eligibility filters the worker population before event processing.
* Integration System Fundamentals: Details how population scoping interacts with event subscriptions and launch parameters.
NEW QUESTION # 32
Refer to the following XML to answer the question below.
You need the integration file to format the ps:PositionJD field to 10 characters and report any truncated values as an error.
How will you start your template match on ps:Position to use Document Transformation (DT) to do the transformation using ETV with your truncation validation?
Answer: A
Explanation:
In Workday integrations, Document Transformation (DT) using XSLT is employed to transform XML data, such as the output from a Core Connector or EIB, into a specific format for third-party systems. In this scenario, you need to transform the ps:Position_ID field within the ps:Position element to a fixed length of 10 characters and report any truncation as an error using Workday's Extension for Transformationand Validation (ETV) attributes. The template must match the ps:Position element and apply the specified formatting and validation rules.
Here's why option D is correct:
* Template Matching: The <xsl:template match="ps:Position"> correctly targets the ps:Position element in the XML, as shown in the provided snippet, ensuring the transformation applies to the appropriate node.
* ETV Attributes:
* etv:fixedLength="10" specifies that the Pos_ID field should be formatted to a fixed length of 10 characters. This ensures the output is truncated or padded (if needed) to meet the length requirement.
* etv:reportTruncation="error" instructs the transformation to raise an error if the ps:Position_ID value exceeds 10 characters and cannot be truncated without data loss, aligning with the requirement to report truncated values as errors.
* XPath Selection: The <xsl:value-of select="ps:Position_Data/ps:Position_ID"/> correctly extracts the ps:Position_ID value from the ps:Position_Data child element, as shown in the XML structure (<ps:
Position_ID>P-00030</ps:Position_ID>).
* Output Structure: The <Position><Pos_ID>...</Pos_ID></Position> structure ensures the transformed data is wrapped in meaningful tags for the target system, maintaining consistency with Workday integration practices.
Why not the other options?
* A.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:template match="ps:Position">
<Position>
<Pos_ID etv:fixedLength="10">
<xsl:value-of select="ps:Position_Data/ps:Position_ID"/>
</Pos_ID>
</Position>
</xsl:template>
This option includes etv:fixedLength="10" but omits etv:reportTruncation="error". Without the truncation reporting, it does not meet the requirement to report truncated values as errors, making it incorrect.
* B.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:template match="ps:Position">
<Position etv:fixedLength="10">
<Pos_ID etv:reportTruncation="error">
<xsl:value-of select="ps:Position_Data/ps:Position_ID"/>
</Pos_ID>
</Position>
</xsl:template>
This applies etv:fixedLength="10" to the Position element instead of Pos_ID, andetv:reportTruncation=" error" to Pos_ID. However, ETV attributes like fixedLength and reportTruncation should be applied to the specific field being formatted (Pos_ID), not the parent element (Position). This misplacement makes it incorrect.
* C.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:template match="ps:Position">
<Position etv:fixedLength="10">
<Pos_ID etv:reportTruncation="error">
<xsl:value-of select="ps:Position_Data/ps:Position_ID"/>
</Pos_ID>
</Position>
</xsl:template>
Similar to option B, this applies etv:fixedLength="10" to Position and etv:reportTruncation="error" to Pos_ID, which is incorrect for the same reason: ETV attributes must be applied to the specific field (Pos_ID) requiring formatting and validation, not the parent element.
To implement this in XSLT for a Workday integration:
* Use the template from option D to match ps:Position, apply etv:fixedLength="10" and etv:
reportTruncation="error" to the Pos_ID element, and extract the ps:Position_ID value using the correct XPath. This ensures the ps:Position_ID (e.g., "P-00030") is formatted to 10 characters and reports any truncation as an error, meeting the integration file requirements.
References:
* Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide: Section on "Document Transformation (DT) and ETV" - Details the use of ETV attributes like fixedLength and reportTruncation for formatting and validating data in XSLT transformations.
* Workday Core Connector and EIB Guide: Chapter on "XML Transformations" - Explains how to use XSLT templates to transform position data, including ETV attributes for length and truncation validation.
* Workday Integration System Fundamentals: Section on "ETV in Integrations" - Covers the application of ETV attributes to specific fields in XML for integration outputs, ensuring compliance with formatting and error-reporting requirements.
NEW QUESTION # 33
You have been asked to refine a report which outputs one row per worker and is being used in an integration that sends worker data to one of your third-party systems. The integration should only send workers who have been hired in the last 30 days. Where in the custom report definition can you specify a condition that would include only workers who have been hired in the last 30 days?
Answer: B
Explanation:
In Workday, when refining a custom report to include specific conditions such as limiting the output to workers hired in the last 30 days, the appropriate place to specify this condition is within theFiltertab of the custom report definition. The Filter tab allows you to define criteria that determine which instances of the primary business object (in this case, "Worker") are included in the report output. This is critical for integrations, as the filtered data ensures that only relevant records are sent to the third-party system.
The requirement here is to restrict the report to workers hired within the last 30 days. In Workday reporting, this can be achieved by adding a filter condition on the "Hire Date" field of the Worker business object.
Specifically, you would configure the filter to compare the "Hire Date" against a dynamic date range, such as
"Current Date minus 30 days" to "Current Date." This ensures the report dynamically adjusts to include only workers hired in the last 30 days each time it runs, which aligns with the needs of an integration sending real- time data to a third-party system.
Here's why the other options are incorrect:
* A. Subfilter: Subfilters in Workday are used to further refine data within a related business object or a subset of data already filtered by the primary filter. They are not the primary mechanism for applying a condition to the main dataset (e.g., all workers). For this scenario, asubfilter would be unnecessary since the condition applies directly to the Worker business object, not a related object.
* B. Output: The Output section of a custom report definition controls how the report is displayed or delivered (e.g., file format, scheduling), not the data selection criteria. It does not allow for specifying conditions like hire date ranges.
* C. Columns: The Columns tab defines which fields are displayed in the report output (e.g., Worker ID, Name, Hire Date). While you can add the "Hire Date" field here for visibility, it does not control which workers are included in the report-that is the role of the Filter tab.
To implement this in practice:
* In the custom report definition, go to theFiltertab.
* Add a new filter condition.
* Select the "Hire Date" field from the Worker business object.
* Set the operator to "in the range" and define the range as "Current Date - 30 days" to "Current Date" (using dynamic date functions available in Workday).
* Save and test the report to ensure it returns only workers hired within the last 30 days.
This filtered report can then be enabled as a web service (via the Advanced tab) or used in an Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) or Workday Studio integration to send the data to the third-party system, meeting the integration requirement.
References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:
* Workday Report Writer Fundamentals: Section on "Creating and Managing Filters" explains how filters are used to limit report data based on specific conditions, such as date ranges.
* Integration System Fundamentals: Discusses how custom reports serve as data sources for integrations and the importance of filters in defining the dataset.
* Core Connectors & Document Transformation: Highlights the use of filtered custom reports in outbound integrations to third-party systems.
NEW QUESTION # 34
Refer to the following XML to answer the question below.
You are an integration developer and need to write XSLT to transform the output of an EIB which is using a web service enabled report to output worker data along with their dependents. You currentlyhave a template which matches on wd:Dependents_Group to iterate over each dependent. Within the template which matches on wd:Dependents_Group you would like to output a relationship code by using an <xsl:choose> statement.
What XSLT syntax would be used to output SP when the dependent relationship is spouse, output CH when the dependent relationship is child, otherwise output OTHER?
Answer: A
Explanation:
In Workday integrations, XSLT is used to transform XML data, such as the output from an Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) or a web service-enabled report, into a desired format for third-party systems. In this scenario, you need to write XSLT to process wd:Dependents_Group elements and output a relationship code based on the value of the wd:Relationship attribute or element. The requirement is tooutput "SP" for a
"Spouse" relationship, "CH" for a "Child" relationship, and "OTHER" for any other relationship, using an
<xsl:choose> statement within a template matching wd:Dependents_Group.
Here's why option C is correct:
* XSLT <xsl:choose> Structure: The <xsl:choose> element in XSLT provides conditional logic similar to a switch statement. It evaluates conditions in <xsl:when> elements sequentially, executing the first matching condition, and uses <xsl:otherwise> for any case that doesn't match.
* Relationship as an Attribute: Based on the provided XML snippet, wd:Relationship is an attribute (e.
g., <wd:Relationship>Spouse</wd:Relationship> within wd:Dependents_Group). However, in Workday XML for integrations, wd:Relationship is often represented as an attribute (@wd:
Relationship) rather than a child element, especially in contexts like dependent data in reports. The syntax @wd:Relationship in the test attribute of <xsl:when> correctly references this attribute, aligning with Workday's typical XML structure for such data.
* Condition Matching:
* The first <xsl:when test="@wd:Relationship='Spouse'">SP</xsl:when> checks if the wd:
Relationship attribute equals "Spouse" and outputs "SP" if true.
* The second <xsl:when test="@wd:Relationship='Child'">CH</xsl:when> checks if the wd:
Relationship attribute equals "Child" and outputs "CH" if true.
* The <xsl:otherwise>OTHER</xsl:otherwise> handles all other cases, outputting "OTHER" if the relationship is neither "Spouse" nor "Child."
* Context in Template: Since the template matches on wd:Dependents_Group, the test conditions operate on the current wd:Dependents_Group element and its attributes, ensuring the correct relationship code is output for each dependent. The XML snippet shows wd:Relationship as an element, but Workday documentation and integration practices often standardize it as an attribute in XSLT transformations, making @wd:Relationship appropriate.
Why not the other options?
* A.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:choose>
<xsl:when test="wd:Relationship='Spouse'">SP</xsl:when>
<xsl:when test="wd:Relationship='Child'">CH</xsl:when>
<xsl:otherwise>OTHER</xsl:otherwise>
</xsl:choose>
This assumes wd:Relationship is a child element of wd:Dependents_Group, not an attribute. The XML snippet shows wd:Relationship as an element, but in Workday integrations, XSLT often expects attributes for efficiency and consistency, especially in report outputs. Using wd:Relationship without @ would not match the attribute-based structure commonly used, making it incorrect for this context.
* B.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:choose>
<xsl:when test="@wd:Relationship='Spouse'">SP</xsl:when>
<xsl:when test="@wd:Relationship='Child'">CH</xsl:when>
<xsl:otherwise>OTHER</xsl:otherwise>
</xsl:choose>
This correctly uses @wd:Relationship for an attribute but has a logical flaw: if wd:Relationship='Child', the second <xsl:when> would output "CH," but the order of conditions matters. However, the primaryissue is that it doesn't match the exact structure or intent as clearly as option C, and Workday documentation often specifies exact attribute-based conditions like those in option C.
* D.
xml
WrapCopy
<xsl:choose>
<xsl:when test="/wd:Relationship='Spouse'">SP</xsl:when>
<xsl:when test="/wd:Relationship='Child'">CH</xsl:when>
<xsl:otherwise>OTHER</xsl:otherwise>
</xsl:choose>
This uses an absolute path (/wd:Relationship), which searches for a wd:Relationship element at the root of the XML document, not within the current wd:Dependents_Group context. This would not work correctly for processing dependents in the context of the template matching wd:Dependents_Group, making it incorrect.
To implement this in XSLT:
* Within your template matching wd:Dependents_Group, you would include the <xsl:choose> statement from option C to evaluate the wd:Relationship attribute and output the appropriate relationship code ("SP," "CH," or "OTHER") based on its value. This ensures the transformation aligns with Workday's XML structure and integration requirements for processing dependent data in an EIB or web service- enabled report, even though the provided XML shows wd:Relationship as an element-XSLT transformations often normalize to attributes for consistency.
References:
* Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide: Section on "XSLT Transformations for Workday Integrations"
- Details the use of <xsl:choose>, <xsl:when>, <xsl:otherwise>, and XPath for conditional logic in XSLT, including handling attributes like @wd:Relationship.
* Workday EIB and Web Services Guide: Chapter on "XML and XSLT for Report Data" - Explains the structure of Workday XML (e.g., wd:Dependents_Group, @wd:Relationship) and how to use XSLT to transform dependent data, including attribute-based conditions.
* Workday Reporting and Analytics Guide: Section on "Web Service-Enabled Reports" - Covers integrating report outputs with XSLT for transformations, including examples of conditional logic for relationship codes.
NEW QUESTION # 35
Refer to the following XML to answer the question below.
You are an integration developer and need to write XSLT to transform the output of an EIB which is making a request to the Get Job Profiles web service operation. The root template of your XSLT matches on the <wd:
Get_Job_Profiles_Response> element. This root template then applies templates against <wd:Job_Profile>.
What XPath syntax would be used to select the value of the ID element which has a wd:type attribute named Job_Profile_ID when the <xsl:value-of> element is placed within the template which matches on <wd:
Job_Profile>?
Answer: D
Explanation:
As an integration developer working with Workday, you are tasked with transforming the output of an Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) that calls the Get_Job_Profiles web service operation. The provided XML shows the response from this operation, and you need to write XSLT to select the value of the <wd:ID> element where the wd:type attribute equals "Job_Profile_ID." The root template of your XSLT matches on
<wd:Get_Job_Profiles_Response> and applies templates to <wd:Job_Profile>. Within this template, you use the <xsl:value-of> element to extract the value. Let's analyze the XML structure, the requirement, and each option to determine the correct XPath syntax.
Understanding the XML and Requirement
The XML snippet provided is a SOAP response from the Get_Job_Profiles web service operation in Workday, using the namespace xmlns:wd="urn:com.workday/bsvc" and version wd:version="v43.0". Key elements relevant to the question include:
* The root element is <wd:Get_Job_Profiles_Response>.
* It contains <wd:Response_Data>, which includes <wd:Job_Profile> elements.
* Within <wd:Job_Profile>, there is <wd:Job_Profile_Reference>, which contains multiple <wd:ID> elements, each with a wd:type attribute:
* <wd:ID wd:type="WID">1740d3eca2f2ed9b6174ca7d2ae88c8c</wd:ID>
* <wd:ID wd:type="Job_Profile_ID">Senior_Benefits_Analyst</wd:ID>
The task is to select the value of the <wd:ID> element where wd:type="Job_Profile_ID" (e.g.,
"Senior_Benefits_Analyst") using XPath within an XSLT template that matches <wd:Job_Profile>. The <xsl:
value-of> element outputs the value of the selected node, so you need the correct XPath path from the <wd:
Job_Profile> context to the specific <wd:ID> element with the wd:type attribute value "Job_Profile_ID." Analysis of Options Let's evaluate each option based on the XML structure and XPath syntax rules:
* Option A: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID/wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'
* This XPath attempts to navigate from wd:Job_Profile_Reference to wd:ID, then to wd:
type='Job_Profile_ID'. However, there are several issues:
* wd:type='Job_Profile_ID' is not valid XPath syntax. In XPath, to filter based on an attribute value, you use the attribute selector [@attribute='value'], not a direct comparison like wd:
type='Job_Profile_ID'.
* wd:type is an attribute of <wd:ID>, not a child element or node. This syntax would not select the <wd:ID> element itself but would be interpreted as trying to match a nonexistent child node or property, resulting in an error or no match.
* This option is incorrect because it misuses XPath syntax for attribute filtering.
* Option B: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID/@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'
* This XPath navigates to wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID and then selects the @wd:type attribute, comparing it to "Job_Profile_ID" with =@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'. However:
* The =@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID' syntax is invalid in XPath. To filter based on an attribute value, you use [@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'] as a predicate, not an equality comparison in this form.
* This XPath would select the wd:type attribute itself (e.g., the string "Job_Profile_ID"), not the value of the <wd:ID> element. Since <xsl:value-of> expects a node or element value, selecting an attribute directly would not yield the desired "Senior_Benefits_Analyst" value.
* This option is incorrect due to the invalid syntax and inappropriate selection of the attribute instead of the element value.
* Option C: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']
* This XPath navigates from wd:Job_Profile_Reference to wd:ID and uses the predicate [@wd:
type='Job_Profile_ID'] to filter for <wd:ID> elements where the wd:type attribute equals
"Job_Profile_ID."
* In the XML, <wd:Job_Profile_Reference> contains:
* <wd:ID wd:type="WID">1740d3eca2f2ed9b6174ca7d2ae88c8c</wd:ID>
* <wd:ID wd:type="Job_Profile_ID">Senior_Benefits_Analyst</wd:ID>
* The predicate [@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'] selects the second <wd:ID> element, whose value is "Senior_Benefits_Analyst."
* Since the template matches <wd:Job_Profile>, and <wd:Job_Profile_Reference> is a direct child of <wd:Job_Profile>, this path is correct:
* <wd:Job_Profile> # <wd:Job_Profile_Reference> # <wd:ID[@wd:
type='Job_Profile_ID']>.
* When used with <xsl:value-of select="wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:
type='Job_Profile_ID']"/>, it outputs "Senior_Benefits_Analyst," fulfilling the requirement.
* This option is correct because it uses proper XPath syntax for attribute-based filtering and selects the desired <wd:ID> value.
* Option D: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID/[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']
* This XPath is similar to Option C but includes an extra forward slash before the predicate: wd:ID/
[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']. In XPath, predicates like [@attribute='value'] are used directly after the node name (e.g., wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']), not separated by a slash. The extra slash is syntactically incorrect and would result in an error or no match, as it implies navigating to a child node that doesn't exist.
* This option is incorrect due to the invalid syntax.
Why Option C is Correct
Option C, wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'], is the correct XPath syntax because:
* It starts from the context node <wd:Job_Profile> (as the template matches this element) and navigates to <wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID>, using the predicate [@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'] to filter for the <wd:ID> element with wd:type="Job_Profile_ID".
* It correctly selects the value "Senior_Benefits_Analyst," which is the content of the <wd:ID> element where wd:type="Job_Profile_ID".
* It uses standard XPath syntax for attribute-based filtering, aligning with Workday's XSLT implementation for web service responses.
* When used with <xsl:value-of>, it outputs the required value, fulfilling the question's requirement.
Practical Example in XSLT
Here's how this might look in your XSLT:
<xsl:template match="wd:Job_Profile">
<xsl:value-of select="wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']"/>
</xsl:template>
This would output "Senior_Benefits_Analyst" for the <wd:ID> element with wd:type="Job_Profile_ID" in the XML.
Verification with Workday Documentation
The Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide and SOAP API Reference (available via Workday Community) detail the structure of the Get_Job_Profiles response and how to use XPath in XSLT for transformations. The XML structure shows <wd:Job_Profile_Reference> containing <wd:ID> elements with wd:type attributes, and the guide emphasizes using predicates like [@wd:type='value'] to filter based on attributes. This is a standard practice for navigating Workday web service responses.
Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide References
* Section: XSLT Transformations in EIBs- Describes using XSLT to transform web service responses, including selecting elements with XPath and attribute predicates.
* Section: Workday Web Services- Details the Get_Job_Profiles operation and its XML output structure, including <wd:Job_Profile_Reference> and <wd:ID> with wd:type attributes.
* Section: XPath Syntax- Explains how to use predicates like [@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'] for attribute- based filtering in Workday XSLT.
* Workday Community SOAP API Reference - Provides examples of XPath navigation for Workday web service responses, including attribute selection.
Option C is the verified answer, as it correctly selects the <wd:ID> value with wd:type="Job_Profile_ID" using the appropriate XPath syntax within the <wd:Job_Profile> template context.
NEW QUESTION # 36
......
Love is precious and the price of freedom is higher. Do you think that learning day and night has deprived you of your freedom? Then let Our Workday-Pro-Integrations guide tests free you from the depths of pain. With Workday-Pro-Integrations guide tests, learning will no longer be a burden in your life. You can save much time and money to do other things what meaningful. You will no longer feel tired because of your studies, if you decide to choose and practice our Workday-Pro-Integrations Test Answers. Your life will be even more exciting.
Workday-Pro-Integrations Latest Dumps Pdf: https://www.itcerttest.com/Workday-Pro-Integrations_braindumps.html
And i love the Software for the best for no matter how many software you have installed on your computers, our Workday-Pro-Integrations learning materials will never be influenced, Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations Testking Learning Materials You just need to check your mail and change your learning methods in accordance with new changes, Workday Workday-Pro-Integrations Testking Learning Materials How to choose valid and efficient guide torrent should be the key topic most candidates may concern, After well preparation, you will be confident to face the Workday-Pro-Integrations Latest Dumps Pdf Workday-Pro-Integrations Latest Dumps Pdf - Workday Pro Integrations Certification Exam actual test.
Part II: In Depth, Product Owners should never Workday-Pro-Integrations forget that features are a means to an end, And i love the Software for the bestfor no matter how many software you have installed on your computers, our Workday-Pro-Integrations Learning Materials will never be influenced.
You just need to check your mail and change your learning methods in Exam Dumps Workday-Pro-Integrations Provider accordance with new changes, How to choose valid and efficient guide torrent should be the key topic most candidates may concern.
After well preparation, you will be confident to face the Workday Integrations Exam Dumps Workday-Pro-Integrations Provider Workday Pro Integrations Certification Exam actual test, If it is useful to you, you can click the button 'add to cart' to finish your order.
BTW, DOWNLOAD part of Itcerttest Workday-Pro-Integrations dumps from Cloud Storage: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_BBQIfhTyoIyCmoRsS4N3pcZhPccWJJA
Your information will never be shared with any third party