Adobe AD0-E906 Adobe Workfront for Experience Manager enhanced connector Expert Exam Practice Test

The requirement is to deploy the com.myCompany.ui.content package specifically to theAEM Cloud Service authorenvironment. The key here is ensuring that the package is targeted correctly to the author instance, without affecting other environments.

Option A uses the following target:

/apps/my-company-packages/content/install.author

The use of install.author ensures that the package will only be installed on theauthor environmentof AEM as a Cloud Service, meeting the developer's requirement. This is a common approach in AEM Cloud Service projects, where you differentiate between environments using the appropriate subfolder (in this case, author).

Option B (author.install) and Option D are similar but incorrect because they are not standard for specifying the exact environment, while Option C (install/) is too generic and could apply to both author and publish environments.

Refer to theAEM Cloud Service documentationon deployment and package management for more details on targeting specific environments such asauthorduring content deployment.

To upload a new version of a document and ensure it is available in AEM Assets, the user must select theNew Versionoption in Workfront. This triggers the version control process where the updated file can be uploaded.

By choosing the Experience Manager integration after selectingNew Version, the system ensures that the latest version of the document is sent to AEM Assets, where it will replace the previous version without losing version history.

This workflow supports maintaining version control between Workfront and AEM, ensuring that the most current version of the asset is always available in both systems.

Refer to theWorkfront-AEM Enhanced Connector Guidefor further details on version control and document updates between Workfront and AEM.

In this case, the organization wants to prevent users from selecting print media options for new entries while still displaying historical data in reports. The best way to achieve this is tohide the print choicesin the dropdown field. This approach ensures that:

Historical data remains unaffected: Since you are only hiding the options and not removing them, existing records with those print media values will continue to display in reports and other views.

No selection of new print options: By hiding these options, users will no longer be able to select them for new records, effectively preventing any further print media classifications.

Removing the print options (Option B) would delete historical data associated with them, which is not desirable for reporting. Moving them to the end of the list (Option C) doesn't restrict users from selecting them, which does not meet the objective of focusing solely on digital work.

This practice aligns with Adobe Workfront's best practices for managing dropdown fields, where options can be hidden but not removed, thus preserving the integrity of historical data while controlling future input.

For more details, refer to theCustom Fieldssection in Workfront's documentation, specifically around managing dropdown options and preserving historical data visibility in reports.

The features requested by the customer, such as automatic folder creation, synchronization of Workfront document custom form values to AEM asset metadata, and automatic publication of assets to Brand Portal upon project completion, rely onEvent Subscriptionsin the enhanced connector configuration.

Event Subscriptionsare triggered when certain events occur, such as project completion or updates to custom form values, ensuring that the correct actions (like folder creation or asset publication) happen automatically.

Option A (Workflows) would be used for content approval processes but not for these specific automatic actions. Option B (Webhooks) can handle external notifications but is not directly relevant for these tasks within AEM and Workfront.

For more information, refer toAEM Enhanced Connector documentationon Event Subscriptions and their use in automating processes.

Given that the company only occasionally needs to upload documents for approval and does not require advanced features like markup or electronic validation, theDocument approvalsfeature in Workfront is the best choice.

Document approvalsallow users to upload documents, assign approvers, and receive approval/rejection responses without the need for advanced proofing or signing functionality.

Options A (Workfront Proof) and B (AdobeSign) provide more advanced capabilities like markup, commenting, and e-signatures, which are unnecessary for this use case.

Refer toWorkfront’s document management featuresfor more information on basic approval workflows.

In this scenario, the best approach is to create separategroupsfor Marketing and IT within the same Workfront instance. Each group will have its owngroup administrator, and each department’s resources (e.g., custom statuses, templates, reports) can be isolated and managed independently by the group admins.

This solution ensures that:

Theexisting IT setupis not disrupted.

The Marketing department can have its own customized Workfront environment without overlapping with IT's configurations.

This approach avoids creating unnecessary complexity (as in Option A with companies) or restricting functionality (as in Option B with teams).

Refer toWorkfront documentation on group managementto learn how to implement group-specific configurations in a single instance.

In AEM, when you need to manage access control (ACL) permissions, including setting specific permissions (like WRITE) for a service user on child nodes without affecting the parent node, thePermission Consoleis the appropriate tool.

ThePermission Consoleallows you to set fine-grained permissions at both node and subnode levels, which is crucial for scenarios where access needs to be applied only to children nodes, not the parent node itself.

Option A (User Management Console) is used for managing user details, and Option C (Group Management Console) manages group settings, but neither of these are used for setting node-level permissions.

Refer to AEM’sUser and Group Access Managementdocumentation for more information on using the Permission Console to manage ACLs effectively.

In this scenario, the company wants only one department to use a custom metadata schema with a‘verifiedBy’ user picker fieldfor image assets. The best approach is to:

Create a new metadata schemafor the specific department.

Extend the Coral UI Componentto create a custom user picker field, which will allow the department to select users from the list of available users in the system.

Option A suggests modifying the default image metadata schema, which could impact all departments, and Option B involves manually adding users to a dropdown, which is not as efficient as using a user picker field.

Refer toAEM documentation on creating custom metadata schemasandextending Coral UI componentsfor more information.

When converting a request to a project in Adobe Workfront, it's important to ensure that custom fields and their values are correctly passed from the request form to the project form. To achieve this, you need to add the same custom field on the project form, but in this case, the calculation should be left blank because the calculated value from the request form will be passed over and does not need to be recalculated at the project level.

Same field: The field needs to be exactly the same (same internal name) so the data can flow between the request and the project during the conversion.

Blank calculation: By leaving the calculation blank, you ensure that the field will accept the value from the request without overriding it or attempting to recalculate it.

For more details on setting up custom forms in Workfront and handling calculated fields during request-to-project conversions, refer to theAdobe Workfront Form Customization Guide.

The requirement is to allow users to select a resource (Creative Manager) from a list of existing users in the Workfront application. The appropriate solution is to use aTypeahead fieldwith theUser object type.

Field type - Typeahead: This field allows users to start typing the name of an individual, and the system will auto-suggest matching users from the Workfront database. This is ideal for scenarios where you need to assign a specific role, like a Creative Manager, from a list of existing users.

Object type - User: By using the User object type, the field will link directly to Workfront's user directory, ensuring that the selection is limited to valid, active resources in the system.

This combination of field and object type is the most efficient for assigning roles based on existing users, as it prevents errors and ensures data consistency by utilizing Workfront’s internal user directory.

Options B and C are not suitable because acalculated fieldis not required, andcheckboxesdo not allow selection from a list of user names.

For further reference, consult theCustom FieldsandTypeahead Fieldssections in Workfront’s documentation, which outline how to configure these fields to enable user selection from the organization’s resource pool.

In AEM Cloud Service, the correct approach to making changes, even urgent ones, is to update the codebase and deploy it through theCloud Manager pipeline. This ensures that the change is part of the version-controlled, immutable repository and follows best practices for deployment.

Immutable infrastructure: AEMaaCS does not allow direct modifications to production environments (e.g., via CRXDE Lite). All changes must be deployed through Cloud Manager, ensuring consistency and traceability.

Making changes directly on production via CRXDE or deploying one-off fixes using the Package Manager (Options B and C) violates AEMaaCS's immutable infrastructure principle and is not supported.

Refer toAdobe Cloud Manager’s documentationfor best practices on deploying urgent fixes in AEM as a Cloud Service.

When configuring the Workfront Enhanced Connector in AEM, Workfront users who will use the connector areautomatically addedto a corresponding AEM user group via the connector. Thisautomatic process ensures that permissions and group assignments are correctly synced between Workfront and AEM without manual intervention.

Option A (using the Import People option in Workfront) refers to importing users into Workfront, not syncing users to AEM. Option C (from the Adobe Admin Console) is related to managing users in the Adobe platform but not specifically for the Enhanced Connector.

Refer toAEM and Workfront Enhanced Connector documentationfor more information on user synchronization and group management.

In this scenario, the proofing workflow needs two stages:

Stage 1: This stage routes the proof to thecreative directorupon proof creation. By selecting "do not allow this stage to be deleted," the workflow ensures that the creative director must always review the proof before it is sent to stakeholders. This ensures consistency in the review process and makes sure the creative director is always involved.

Stage 2: This stage activates whenall decisions are madeon the parent stage (i.e., the creative director’s approval). Additionally, since the creative agency only requiresone decision from each company, the "only one decision required" setting is appropriate to speed up the process while ensuring the necessary approvals are gathered.

Option B is incorrect because setting the stage as private may hinder collaboration, and Option C suggests waiting until all decisions are approved, which is not necessary in this scenario.

Refer toWorkfront documentation on proofing workflowsfor details on setting up multi-stage approval processes.

For a multi-faceted holiday promotion involving several teams and unique workflows, the best way to track the associated assets is to:

Establish the holiday promotion as a Program: This allows all related projects, each corresponding to a specific marketing platform (e.g., social media, email), to be grouped under a single program for easy tracking.

Associate each project with the Program: This ensures that all related assets and workflows are linked to the holiday promotion and can be reported on collectively.

Create a Project-level Custom Form Field: This will capture specific details related to the holiday promotion for each project, allowing for more tailored reporting.

Create a Project Report filtered to the holiday promotion: This report will enable leadership and stakeholders to track the progress of all assets related to the promotion and ensure on-time delivery.

Option A involves creating a Program for each platform, which adds unnecessary complexity. Option B is similar but lacks the specific tracking of custom fields at the project level.

Refer toWorkfront’s documentation on managing Programs and custom formsfor details on setting up and reporting on large campaigns.

In AEM, to limit the number of concurrent workflows running at the same time, you need to adjust theMaximum Parallel Jobssetting in the OSGI console. This setting controls how many workflow jobs can be processed simultaneously, and reducing this number will lower the load on the server by limiting the number of workflows that can run concurrently.

This setting can be found under theDay CQ Workflow - Workflow Engineconfiguration in the OSGI Web Console.

Options B and C refer to specific workflows and threads, but they do not directly address the overall system limit on concurrent workflow executions.

Refer to theAEM documentation on workflow scaling and performancefor more information on how to adjust these settings in the OSGI configuration.

To create watermarked renditions for onlysomeof the assets in AEM, the best approach is to create anew workflow modelthat includes theAdd Watermark process. This new workflow can be selectively applied to specific assets as needed, rather than modifying the global DAM Update Asset workflow which would affect all assets.

Selective application: By creating a custom workflow model, users can choose which assets will go through the watermarking process, providing more control and preventing unnecessary watermarking of all assets.

Option B and C suggest modifying the existing DAM Update Asset workflow, which could result in watermarking all assets, not just the desired ones, and is not flexible for specific asset selection.

Refer to AEM’sworkflow documentationfor more information on creating custom workflows and adding watermark processes.