Workday-Pro-Integrations Workday Pro Integrations Certification Exam Questions and Answers

The scenario involves a Core Connector: Worker integration using DIS to export a full file of personal data, restricted to employees only (excluding contingent workers). In Workday, the Worker business object includes both employees and contingent workers, so a filter is needed to limit the population. Let’s explore the configuration:

Requirement:Ensure the integration outputs only employees, not contingent workers. This is a population-level filter, not a field transformation or override.

Integration Population Eligibility:In Core Connectors, theConfigure Integration Population Eligibilityrelated action defines which workers are included in the integration’s dataset. You can set eligibility rules, such as "Worker Type equals Employee" (or exclude "Contingent Worker"), to filter the population before data is extracted. For a full file export (no change detection), this ensures the entire output is limited to employees.

Option Analysis:

A. Configure the Integration Population Eligibility: Correct. This filters the worker population to employees only, aligning with the requirement at the dataset level.

B. Configure a map for worker type in the Integration Maps: Incorrect. Integration Maps transform field values (e.g., "Employee" to "EMP"), not filter the population of workers included in the extract.

C. Configure worker type in the Integration Field Attributes: Incorrect. Integration Field Attributes refine how a field is output (e.g., phone type), not the overall population eligibility.

D. Configure eligibility in the Integration Field Overrides: Incorrect. Integration Field Overrides replace field values with custom data (e.g., a calculated field), not define the population of workers.

Implementation:

Edit the Core Connector: Worker integration.

Use the related actionConfigure Integration Population Eligibility.

Add a rule: "Worker Type equals Employee" (or exclude "Contingent Worker").

Save and test to ensure only employee data is exported.

References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:

Core Connectors & Document Transformation: Section on "Configuring Integration Population Eligibility" explains filtering the worker population for outbound integrations.

Integration System Fundamentals: Discusses population scoping in Core Connectors to meet specific export criteria.

The scenario involves a Core Connector: Worker integration using the Data Initialization Service (DIS) to export a full file of employee personal data, with a requirement to include a calculated field in the output. Core Connectors rely on predefined field mappings, but custom calculated fields need specific configuration to be included. Let’s analyze the solution:

Requirement:Output the value of a calculated field created for this integration. In Workday, calculated fields are custom-built (e.g., using Report Writer or Calculated Fields) and not part of the standard Core Connector template, so they must be explicitly added to the output.

Integration Field Overrides:In Core Connectors,Integration Field Overridesallow you to replace a delivered field’s value or add a new field to the output by mapping it to a calculated field. This is the standard method to include custom calculated fields in the integration file. You create the calculated field separately,then use overrides to specify where its value appears in the output structure (e.g., as a new column or replacing an existing field).

Option Analysis:

A. Configure Integration Field Attributes: Incorrect. Integration Field Attributes refine how delivered fields are output (e.g., filtering multi-instance data like phone type), but they don’t support adding or mapping calculated fields.

B. Configure Integration Field Overrides: Correct. This configuration maps the calculated field to the output, ensuring its value is included in the exported file.

C. Configure Integration Attributes: Incorrect. Integration Attributes define integration-level settings (e.g., file name, delivery protocol), not field-specific outputs like calculated fields.

D. Configure Integration Maps: Incorrect. Integration Maps transform existing field values (e.g., "Married" to "M"), but they don’t add new fields or directly output calculated fields.

Implementation:

Create the calculated field in Workday (e.g., via Create Calculated Field task).

Edit the Core Connector: Worker integration.

Navigate to theIntegration Field Overridessection.

Add a new override, selecting the calculated field and specifying its output position (e.g., a new field ID or overriding an existing one).

Test the integration to confirm the calculated field value appears in the output file.

References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:

Core Connectors & Document Transformation: Section on "Configuring Integration Field Overrides" explains how to include calculated fields in Core Connector outputs.

Integration System Fundamentals: Notes the use of overrides for custom data in predefined integration templates.

In Workday reporting, selecting the appropriatePrimary Business Object (PBO)andRelated Business Objects (RBOs)is critical to ensure that the report retrieves and organizes data correctly based on the requirements. The requirement here is to create a report that outputs one row per worker for a specified supervisory organization, including their active benefit plans and the names and ages of all related dependents. The Worker business object contains fields like Employee, Benefit Plans, and Dependents, while the Dependent business object provides the Name and Age fields for dependents.

Why Worker as the PBO?The report needs to output "one row per worker," making the Worker business object the natural choice for the PBO. In Workday, the PBO defines the primary dataset and determines the granularity of the report (i.e., one row per instance of the PBO). Since the report revolves around workers and their associated data (benefit plans and dependents), Worker is the starting point. Additionally, the requirement specifies a supervisory organization at runtime, which is a filter applied to the Worker business object to limit the population.

Why Dependent as an RBO?The Worker business object includes a "Dependents" field, which is a multi-instance field linking to the Dependent business object. To access detailed dependent data (Name and Age), the Dependent business object must be added as an RBO. This allows the report to pull in the related dependent information for each worker. Without the Dependent RBO, the report could only reference the existence of dependents, not their specific attributes like Name and Age.

Analysis of Benefit Plans:The Worker business object already contains the "Benefit Plans" field, which provides access to active benefit plan data. Since this is a field directly available on the PBO (Worker), no additional RBO is needed to retrieve benefit plan information.

Option Analysis:

A. PBO: Dependent, RBO: Worker: Incorrect. If Dependent were the PBO, the report would output one row per dependent, not one row per worker, which contradicts the requirement. Additionally, Worker as an RBO would unnecessarily complicate accessing worker-level data.

B. PBO: Worker, RBO: Dependent: Correct. This aligns with the requirement: Worker as the PBO ensures one row per worker, and Dependent as the RBO provides access to dependent details (Name and Age). Benefit Plans are already accessible via the Worker PBO.

C. PBO: Dependent, no RBOs: Incorrect.This would result in one row per dependent and would not allow easy access to worker or benefit plan data, failing to meet the "one row per worker" requirement.

D. PBO: Worker, no RBOs: Incorrect. While Worker as the PBO is appropriate, omitting the Dependent RBO prevents the report from retrieving dependent Name and Age fields, which are stored in the Dependent business object, not directly on Worker.

Implementation:

Create a custom report withWorkeras the PBO.

Add a filter for the supervisory organization (specified at runtime) on the Worker PBO.

AddDependentas an RBO to access Name and Age fields.

Include columns from Worker (e.g., Employee, Benefit Plans) and Dependent (e.g., Name, Age).

References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:

Workday Report Writer Fundamentals: Section on "Selecting Primary and Related Business Objects" explains how the PBO determines the report’s row structure and RBOs extend data access to related objects.

Integration System Fundamentals: Discusses how multi-instance fields (e.g., Dependents on Worker) require RBOs to retrieve detailed attributes.

The scenario involves a Core Connector: Worker integration using the Data Initialization Service (DIS) to export a full file of employee personal data. The vendor requires marital status values to be transformed from Workday’s internal text values (e.g., "Married," "Single") to a specific list of codes (e.g., "M," "S"), and any Workday value not matching the vendor’s list should output "OTHER." Let’s analyze the configuration:

Requirement:Transform the "Marital Status" field values into vendor-specific codes, with a fallback to "OTHER" for unmapped values. This is a field-level transformation, common in Core Connectors when aligning Workday data with external system requirements.

Integration Maps:In Core Connectors,Integration Mapsare the primary tool for transforming field values. You create a map that defines source values (Workday’s marital status text) and target values (vendor’s codes). The "Default" setting in an integration map specifies what value to output if a Workday value isn’t explicitly mapped. Here, setting the default to "OTHER" ensures that any marital status not in the vendor’s list (e.g., a new Workday value like "Civil Union" not recognized by the vendor) is output as "OTHER."

Option Analysis:

A. Configure Integration Maps with a blank Default: Incorrect. A blank default would leave the field empty or pass the original Workday value for unmapped cases, not "OTHER," failing the requirement.

B. Configure Integration Attributes with a blank Default: Incorrect. Integration Attributes define integration-level settings (e.g., file name, delivery method), not field value transformations. They don’t support mapping or defaults for specific fields like marital status.

C. Configure Integration Maps with "OTHER" as a Default: Correct. This uses Integration Maps to map Workday values to vendor codes and sets "OTHER" as the default for unmapped values, meeting the requirement fully.

D. Configure Integration Attributes with "OTHER" as a Default: Incorrect. Integration Attributes don’t handle field-level transformations or defaults for data values, making this option inapplicable.

Implementation:

Edit the Core Connector: Worker integration.

Use the related actionConfigure Integration Maps.

Create a map for the "Marital Status" field (e.g., "Married" → "M," "Single" → "S").

Set theDefault Valueto "OTHER" in the map configuration.

Test the output to ensure mapped values use vendor codes and unmapped values return "OTHER."

References from Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide:

Core Connectors & Document Transformation: Section on "Configuring Integration Maps" explains mapping field values and using defaults for unmapped cases.

Integration System Fundamentals: Highlights how Core Connectors transform data to meet vendor specifications.

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 element. The root template of your XSLT matches on and applies a template to . Within this template, you use the 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 .

It contains , which includes elements.

Within , there are:

, which contains elements (e.g., a Job_Profile_ID).

, which contains with the value Senior_Benefits_Analyst.

The task is to select the value of (e.g., "Senior_Benefits_Analyst") using XPath within an XSLT template that matches . The element outputs the value of the selected node, so you need the correct XPath path from the context to .

Analysis of Options

Let’s evaluate each option based on the XML structure and XPath syntax rules:

Option A: wd:Job_Profile/wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code

This XPath starts from wd:Job_Profile and navigates to wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code. However, in the XML, is the parent element, and is a direct child containing . The path wd:Job_Profile/wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code is technically correct in terms of structure, as it follows the hierarchy:

→ → .

However, since the template matches , the context node is already . You don’t need to include wd:Job_Profile/ at the beginning of the XPath unless navigating from a higher level. Starting directly with wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code (Option C) is more concise and appropriate for the context. This option is technically valid but redundant and less efficient, making it less preferred compared to Option C.

Option B: wd:Job_Profile_Data[@wd:Job_Code]

This XPath uses an attribute selector ([@wd:Job_Code]) to filter based on an attribute named wd:Job_Code. However, examining the XML, does not have a wd:Job_Code attribute—it has a child element with the value "Senior_Benefits_Analyst." The [@attribute] syntax is used for attributes, not child elements, so this XPath is incorrect. It would not select the value and would likely return no results or an error. This option is invalid.

Option C: wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code

This XPath starts from wd:Job_Profile_Data (a direct child of ) and navigates to wd:Job_Code. Since the template matches , the contextnode is , and wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code correctly points to the element within . This path is:

Concise and appropriate for the context.

Directly selects the value "Senior_Benefits_Analyst" when used with .

Matches the XML structure, as contains as a child.

This is the most straightforward and correct option for selecting the value within the template.

Option D: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID']

This XPath navigates to (a child of ) and then to with an attribute wd:type="Job_Profile_ID". In the XML, contains:

1740d3eca2f2ed9b6174ca7d2ae88c8c

Senior_Benefits_Analyst

The XPath wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type='Job_Profile_ID'] selects the element with wd:type="Job_Profile_ID", which has the value "Senior_Benefits_Analyst." However, this is not the value—the is a separate element under , not . The question specifically asks for the value, so this option is incorrect, as it selects a different piece of data (the job profile ID, not the job code).

Why Option C is Correct

Option C, wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code, is the correct XPath syntax because:

It starts from the context node (as the template matches this element) and navigates to , which directly selects the element’s value ("Senior_Benefits_Analyst").

It is concise and aligns with standard XPath navigation in XSLT, avoiding unnecessary redundancy (unlike Option A) or incorrect attribute selectors (unlike Option B).

It matches the XML structure, where is a child of and contains as a child.

When used with in the template, it outputs the job code value, fulfilling the requirement.

Practical Example in XSLT

Here’s how this might look in your XSLT:

xml

WrapCopy

This would output "Senior_Benefits_Analyst" for the element 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 as the container for job profile details, including . The guide emphasizes using relative XPath paths within templates to navigate from the matched element (e.g., ) to child elements like .

Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide References

Section: XSLT Transformations in EIBs– Describes using XSLT to transform web service responses, including selecting elements with XPath.

Section: Workday Web Services– Details the Get_Job_Profiles operation and its XML output structure, including and .

Section: XPath Syntax– Explains how to navigate XML hierarchies in Workday XSLT, using relative paths like wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code from a context.

Workday Community SOAP API Reference – Provides examples of XPath navigation for Workday web service responses.

Option C is the verified answer, as it correctly selects the value using the appropriate XPath syntax within the template context.

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 statement within a template matching wd:Dependents_Group.

Here’s why option C is correct:

XSLT <xsl:choose> Structure: The element in XSLT provides conditional logic similar to a switch statement. It evaluates conditions in elements sequentially, executing the first matching condition, and uses for any case that doesn’t match.

Relationship as an Attribute: Based on the provided XML snippet, wd:Relationship is an attribute (e.g., Spouse 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 correctly references this attribute, aligning with Workday’s typical XML structure for such data.

Condition Matching:

The first SP checks if the wd:Relationship attribute equals "Spouse" and outputs "SP" if true.

The second CH checks if the wd:Relationship attribute equals "Child" and outputs "CH" if true.

The OTHER 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

SP

CH

OTHER

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

SP

CH

OTHER

This correctly uses @wd:Relationship for an attribute but has a logical flaw: if wd:Relationship='Child', the second 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

SP

CH

OTHER

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 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 , , , 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.

Understanding the Requirement

The question involves scheduling an integration in Workday to deliver a file containing recent compensation changes to an external system. The key requirements are:

The file must be delivered routinely at 5 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST).

The recurrence should exclude weekends (i.e., run only on weekdays: Monday through Friday).

The file should include compensation changes since the last integration run, implying an incremental data pull, though this does not directly affect the recurrence type.

The task is to identify the correctrecurrence typefor the integration schedule from the given options:A. Recurs every 12 hoursB. Recurs every weekdayC. Dependent recurrenceD. Recurs every 1 day(s)

Analysis of the Workflow and Recurrence Options

In Workday, integrations are scheduled using theIntegration Schedulefunctionality, typically within tools like Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) or Workday Studio, though this scenario aligns closely with EIB for routine file-based integrations. The recurrence type determines how frequently and under what conditions the integration runs. Let’s evaluate each option against the requirements:

Step-by-Step Breakdown

Time Specification (5 PM EST):

Workday allows scheduling integrations at a specific time of day (e.g., 5 PM EST). This is set in the schedule configuration and is independent of the recurrence type but confirms the need for a daily-based recurrence with a specific time slot.

Exclusion of Weekends:

The requirement explicitly states the integration should not run on weekends (Saturday and Sunday), meaning it should only execute on weekdays (Monday through Friday). This is a critical filter for choosing the recurrence type.

Incremental Data (Since Last Run):

The file must include compensation changes since the last integration run. In Workday, this is typically handled by configuring the integration (e.g., via a data source filter or "changed since" parameter in EIB), not the recurrence type. Thus, this requirement does not directly influence the recurrence type but confirms the integration runs periodically.

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 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 correctly extracts the ps:Position_ID value from the ps:Position_Data child element, as shown in the XML structure (P-00030).

Output Structure: The ... 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

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

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

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.

In Workday integrations, Document Transformation (DT) using XSLT with Workday Transformation Toolkit (XTT) attributes is used 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, truncate the value if it exceeds 10 characters, and align the output to the left. The template must match the ps:Position element and apply these formatting rules using XTT attributes.

Here’s why option A is correct:

Template Matching: The correctly targets the ps:Position element in the XML, as shown in the provided snippet, ensuring the transformation applies to the appropriate node.

XTT Attributes:

xtt:fixedLength="10" specifies that the Pos_ID field should be formatted to a fixed length of 10 characters. If the ps:Position_ID value exceeds 10 characters, it will be truncated (by default, XTT truncates without raising an error unless explicitly configured otherwise), meeting the requirement to truncate if the value exceeds.

xtt:align="left" ensures that the output is left-aligned within the 10-character field, aligning with the requirement to align everything to the left.

XPath Selection: The correctly extracts the ps:Position_ID value (e.g., "P-00030") from the ps:Position_Data child element, as shown in the XML structure.

Output Structure: The ... 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?

B.

xml

WrapCopy

This applies xtt:align="left" to the xsl:template element instead of the Pos_ID element. XTT attributes like fixedLength and align must be applied directly to the element being formatted (Pos_ID), not the template itself, making this incorrect.

C.

xml

WrapCopy

This applies xtt:fixedLength="10" to the Position element and xtt:align="left" to Pos_ID. However, XTT attributes like fixedLength and align should be applied to the specific field being formatted (Pos_ID), not the parent element (Position). This misplacement makes it incorrect.

D.

xml

WrapCopy

This applies xtt:fixedLength="10" to the xsl:template element and xtt:align="left" to Pos_ID. Similar to option B, XTT attributes must be applied to the specific element (Pos_ID) being formatted, not the template itself, making this incorrect.

To implement this in XSLT for a Workday integration:

Use the template from option A to match ps:Position, apply xtt:fixedLength="10" and xtt:align="left" 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, truncated if necessary, and left-aligned, meeting the integration file requirements.

References:

Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide: Section on "Document Transformation (DT) and XTT" – Details the use of XTT attributes like fixedLength and align for formatting data in XSLT transformations, including truncation behavior.

Workday Core Connector and EIB Guide: Chapter on "XML Transformations" – Explains how to use XSLT templates with XTT attributes to transform position data, including fixed-length formatting and alignment.

Workday Integration System Fundamentals: Section on "XTT in Integrations" – Covers the application of XTT attributes to specific fields in XML for integration outputs, ensuring compliance with formatting requirements like length and alignment.

In Workday, when you need to upload a new XSLT (Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformations) file to modify or replace an existing transformation within a pre-existing document transformation integration system, the specific task required is "Edit XSLT Attachment Transformation." This task allows users to update the XSLT file that governs how XML data is transformed within the integration system without creating an entirely new transformation object.

Here’s why this is the correct answer:

Workday’s integration systems often rely on XSLT to transform XML data into the desired format for downstream systems or processes. When an XSLT file has already been associated with an integration system (e.g., as part of an Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB) or a Document Transformation Connector), updating it requires accessing the existing transformation configuration.

The "Edit XSLT Attachment Transformation" task enables users to upload a revised version of the XSLT file. This action replaces the previous file while maintaining the integration system’s configuration, ensuring continuity without necessitating additional changes to the system itself.

This task is distinct from other options because it specifically targets the transformation logic (XSLT) rather than broader integration components or services.

Let’s examine why the other options are incorrect:

A. Edit Integration Attachment: This task is used to manage generic attachments associated with an integration, such as input files or supplementary documents, but it does not specifically address XSLT transformations. It lacks the precision required for updating transformation logic.

B. Edit Integration Attachment Service: This is not a recognized task in Workday’s integration framework. It appears to be a conflation of terms and does not align with the documented processes for managing XSLT files.

D. Edit Integration Service Attachment: While this might suggest modifying an attachment related to an integration service, it is not the correct task for handling XSLT files in a document transformation context. Workday documentation consistently points to "Edit XSLT Attachment Transformation" for this purpose.

The process typically involves:

Navigating to the integration system in Workday (e.g., via the "Search" bar by entering the integration system name).

Using the related actions menu to select "Integration System" > "Edit XSLT Attachment Transformation."

Uploading the new XSLT file, which must comply with Workday’s size limitations (e.g., 30 MB for attachments) and be properly formatted.

Saving the changes, which updates the transformation logic without altering other integration configurations.

This approach ensures that transformations remain aligned with business requirements, such as reformatting data for compatibility with external systems, while leveraging Workday’s secure and efficient integration tools.

References:

Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide: "Configure Integration System - TRANSFORMATION" section, which details the use of XSLT files in document transformations and the associated tasks.

Workday Documentation: "Enterprise Interface Builder (EIB)" and "Document Transformation Connector" sections, where the "Edit XSLT Attachment Transformation" task is outlined for updating XSLT files.

Workday Community: Guidance on managing XSLT attachments, confirming this task as the standard method for updating pre-existing transformations.

For an XSLT (Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformations) file to be considered valid in the context of Workday integrations (and per general XSLT standards), it must adhere to specific structural and functional requirements. The correct answer is that an XSLT file must containa root element,a namespace, andat least one template. Below is a detailed explanation of why this is the case, grounded in Workday’s integration practices and XSLT specifications:

Root Element:

Every valid XSLT file must have a single root element, which serves as the top-level container for the stylesheet. In XSLT, this is typically the or element (both are interchangeable, though is more common).

The root element defines the structure of the XSLT document and encapsulates all other elements, such as templates and namespaces. Without a root element, the file would not conform to XML well-formedness rules, which are a prerequisite for XSLT validity.

Example:

Namespace:

An XSLT file must declare the XSLT namespace, typically http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform, to identify it as an XSLT stylesheet and enable the processor to recognize XSLT-specific elements (e.g., , ). This is declared within the root element using the xmlns:xsl attribute.

The namespace ensures that the elements used in the stylesheet are interpreted as XSLT instructions rather than arbitrary XML. Without this namespace, the file would not function as an XSLT stylesheet, as the processor would not know how to process its contents.

In Workday’s Document Transformation integrations, additional namespaces (e.g., for Workday-specific schemas) may also be included, but the XSLT namespace is mandatory for validity.

At Least One Template:

An XSLT file must contain at least one element to define the transformation logic. Templates are the core mechanism by which XSLT processes input XML and produces output. They specify rules for matching nodes in the source XML (via the match attribute) and generating the transformed result.

Without at least one template, the stylesheet would lack any transformation capability, rendering it functionally invalid for its intended purpose. Even a minimal XSLT file requires a template to produce meaningful output, though built-in default templates exist, they are insufficient for custom transformations like those used in Workday.

Example:

Hello, Workday!

Complete Minimal Valid XSLT Example:

Transformed Data

Why Other Options Are Incorrect:

A. A root element, namespace, and at least one transformation: While this is close, "transformation" is not a precise term in XSLT. The correct requirement is a "template," which defines the transformation logic. "Transformation" might imply the overall process, but the specific feature required in the file is a template.

C. A header, a footer, and a namespace: XSLT files do not require a "header" or "footer." These terms are not part of XSLT or XML standards. The structure is defined by the root element and templates, not headers or footers, making this option invalid.

D. A template, a prefix, and a header: While a template is required, "prefix" (likely referring to the namespace prefix like xsl:) is not a standalone feature—it’s part of the namespace declaration within the root element. "Header" is not a required component, making this option incorrect.

Workday Context:

In Workday’s Document Transformation systems (e.g., Core Connectors or custom integrations), XSLT files are uploaded as attachment transformations. Workday enforces these requirements to ensure the stylesheets can process XML data (e.g., from Workday reports or connectors) into formats suitable for external systems. The Workday platform validates these components whenan XSLT file is uploaded, rejecting files that lack a root element, namespace, or functional templates.

Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide References:

Workday Integration System Fundamentals: Describes the structure of XSLT files, emphasizing the need for a root element (), the XSLT namespace, and templates as the building blocks of transformation logic.

Document Transformation Module: Details the requirements for uploading valid XSLT files in Workday, including examples that consistently feature a root element, namespace declaration, and at least one template (e.g., "XSLT Basics for Document Transformation").

Core Connectors and Document Transformation Course Manual: Provides sample XSLT files used in labs, all of which include these three components to ensure functionality within Workday integrations.

Workday Community Documentation: Reinforces that XSLT files must be well-formed XML with an XSLT namespace and at least one template to be processed correctly by Workday’s integration engine.

The scenario describes a Core Connector: Worker integration configured to output specific fields (Position Title and Business Title) for workers who meet the Integration Population Eligibility criteria (Is Manager = true) and where the Transaction Log service is subscribed to the "Position Edit Event." The integration is launched with specific date parameters, and a test edit is made to Jared Ellis’ position, who is a manager. However, despite the edit being completed with an effective date of 05/24/2024 and an entry moment of 05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM, Jared does not appear in the output. Let’s analyze why and determine the correct configuration element to modify.

In Workday integrations, the Core Connector: Worker uses change detection mechanisms to identify and process updates based on the Transaction Log and date launch parameters. The Transaction Log service captures events such as the "Position Edit Event" and records them with anEffective Date(when the change takes effect) and anEntry Moment(when the change was entered into the system). The integration’s date launch parameters define the time window for which changes are retrieved:

As of Entry Moment:05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM – This specifies the latest point in time for when changes were entered into Workday.

Effective Date:05/25/2024 – This defines the date for which the changes are effective.

Last Successful As of Entry Moment:05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM – This indicates the starting point for entry moments from the last successful run.

Last Successful Effective Date:05/23/2024 – This indicates the starting point for effective dates from the last successful run.

For an incremental run (like this one, since "Last Successful" parameters are provided), Workday processes changes where theEntry Momentfalls between theLast Successful As of Entry Moment(05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM) and theAs of Entry Moment(05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM), and where theEffective Datefalls between theLast Successful Effective Date(05/23/2024) and theEffective Date(05/25/2024).

Now, let’s evaluate Jared Ellis’ edit:

Entry Moment:05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM – This falls within the range of 05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM to 05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM.

Effective Date:05/24/2024 – This falls within the range of 05/23/2024 to 05/25/2024.

At first glance, Jared’s edit seems to fit the date parameter window. However, the issue lies in thetime componentof the date launch parameters. Workday interprets these parameters with precision down to the second. TheAs of Entry Momentis set to 05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM (midnight), which is the very start of May 25, 2024. Jared’sEntry Momentof 05/24/2024 07:58:53 AM is correctly within the range from 05/23/2024 12:00:00 AM to 05/25/2024 12:00:00 AM. However, the Transaction Log subscription to "Position Edit Event" relies on the change being fully processed and available in the log by the time the integration runs.

The integration might have run at a point where the effective date window or the subscription logic did not correctly capture the event due to a mismatch in how theEffective Dateis evaluated against theLast Successful Effective Date. Specifically, if the integration only processes changes with anEffective DatestrictlyaftertheLast Successful Effective Date(05/23/2024) up to theEffective Date(05/25/2024), and the logic excludes changes effective exactly on 05/24/2024 due to a boundary condition or a timing issue in the transaction log, Jared’s change might not be picked up.

To resolve this, modifying theDate launch parametersis necessary. Adjusting theAs of Entry Momentto a later time (e.g., 05/25/2024 11:59:59 PM) or ensuring theEffective Daterange explicitly includes all changes effective on or after 05/23/2024 through 05/25/2024 would ensure Jared’s edit is captured. This adjustment aligns the time window to include all relevant transactions logged before the integration run.

Let’s evaluate the other options:

A. Integration Population Eligibility:This is set to "Is Manager = true," and Jared is a manager. This filter is working correctly and does not need modification.

B. Integration Field Attributes:These are configured to output Position Title and Business Title, and the edit was to the Job Profile (part of Position Data). The fields are appropriately configured, so this is not the issue.

D. Transaction Log Subscription:The subscription is set to "Position Edit Event," which matches Jared’s edit. The subscription type is correct, so no change is needed here.

Thus, the issue stems from the date launch parameters not fully encompassing the timing of Jared’s edit in the Transaction Log, makingC. Date launch parametersthe correct answer.

Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide References

Workday Integrations Study Guide: Core Connector: Worker– Section on "Change Detection Using Transaction Log" explains how Transaction Log subscriptions filter events based on date parameters.

Workday Integrations Study Guide: Launch Parameters– Details the role of "As of Entry Moment" and "Effective Date" in defining the scope of incremental runs.

Workday Integrations Study Guide: Incremental Processing– Describes how "Last Successful" parameters establish the baseline for detecting changes in subsequent runs.