無料でクラウドストレージから最新のPass4Test Workday-Pro-Integrations PDFダンプをダウンロードする：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1h4otYl6JtjrYemkiYsZmkKp7lklAJY5h
Pass4TestのWorkday-Pro-Integrations問題集は実際のWorkday-Pro-Integrations認定試験と同じです。この問題集は実際試験の問題をすべて含めることができるだけでなく、問題集のソフト版はWorkday-Pro-Integrations試験の雰囲気を完全にシミュレートすることもできます。Pass4Testの問題集を利用してから、試験を受けるときに簡単に対処し、楽に高い点数を取ることができます。
| トピック | 出題範囲 |
|---|---|
| トピック 1 |
|
| トピック 2 |
|
| トピック 3 |
|
| トピック 4 |
|
| トピック 5 |
|
>> Workday-Pro-Integrations技術内容 <<
Workday品質の点では、Workday-Pro-IntegrationsのWorkday Pro Integrations Certification Exam練習エンジンは手頃な価格で持続不可能です。 近年、あらゆる業界のコストが常に増加していますが、Workday-Pro-Integrations学習教材は低レベルのままです。 それは、私たちの会社が私たちの日常業務を導く顧客志向の信条を見ているからです。 富や名声の達成は、Workday-Pro-Integrations練習エンジンのWorkday Pro Integrations Certification Exam効率と専門性についての刺激的なフィードバックよりも重要です。 だから、私たちPass4Testの練習教材はあなたが誇りに思うべき素晴らしい教材です！
質問 # 85
You are creating an outbound connector using the Core Connector: Organization Outbound template. The vendor has provided the following requirements for how the data should appear in the output file.
The vendor would also like to change the default document retention policy of 30 days to 7 days. What tasks do you need to use to configure this in your connector?
正解：B
解説：
When creating an outbound connector using the Workday Core Connector: Organization Outbound template, you need to configure the connector to meet specific vendor requirements, such as formatting output data and adjusting document retention policies. Let's break down the question and analyze the requirements and options based on Workday's integration framework, specifically focusing on the Core Connector and its configuration tasks.
Understanding the Requirements
Output Data Formatting:The vendor has provided a table specifying how organization types should appear in the output file (e.g., Cost Center as "CC", Pay Group as "PAY", Supervisory as "S", and any other value as "OTHER"). This indicates a need to transform or map Workday organization data into specific output values, which is typically handled by configuring how fields are processed or mapped in the integration.
Document Retention Policy Change:The vendor wants to change the default document retention policy from 30 days to 7 days. In Workday, document retention policies for integrations (e.g., files stored on SFTP or other delivery methods) are managed through integration settings, specifically attributes related to file retention or delivery options.
Analyzing Workday Core Connector: Organization Outbound
The Core Connector: Organization Outbound template is a pre-built Workday integration template used to extract organization-related data (e.g., cost centers, pay groups, supervisory organizations) and send it to an external system. It leverages Workday's integration framework, including integration maps, field overrides, and attributes, to customize data output and behavior.
Integration Maps: Used to define how data is transformed or mapped from Workday to the output format, often involving XSLT or predefined mappings.
Integration Field Overrides: Allow you to override or customize how specific fields are displayed or formatted in the output, such as mapping "Cost Center" to "CC" as per the vendor's table.
Integration Attributes: Control broader integration settings, such as delivery methods, file formats, and retention policies (e.g., document retention duration).
Integration Field Attributes: Typically focus on specific field-level properties but are less commonly used for retention policies or broad mappings compared to the above options.
Evaluating the Vendor's Output Requirements
The table provided (Cost Center → "CC", Pay Group → "PAY", Supervisory → "S", any other value → "OTHER") suggests a need to transform or override the default output values for organization types. This is a field-level customization, best handled by Integration Field Overrides, which allow you to specify custom values or formats for specific fields in the output.
For example, in the Core Connector, you can use Integration Field Overrides to map the Workday organization type (e.g., "Cost_Center") to the vendor's desired output ("CC"). This is a common practice for outbound integrations where external systems require specific formatting.
Evaluating the Retention Policy Change
The default document retention policy of 30 days needs to be changed to 7 days. In Workday, retention policies for integration output files (e.g., files delivered via SFTP or email) are configured as part of the integration's attributes, not field-level settings.
Integration Attributes are used to manage integration-wide settings, including delivery options, file retention periods, and other global configurations. You can specify the retention period (e.g., 7 days) in the attributes section of the Core Connector configuration.
This is distinct from field-level overrides or maps, as retention is not tied to individual data fields but to the integration's output management.
Analyzing the Options
Now, let's evaluate each option to determine which tasks are needed to meet both requirements:
A . Configure Integration Maps and Configure Integration Attributes
Integration Maps: These are used for broader data transformations or mappings, such as converting Workday XML to another format or defining complex data relationships. While they could theoretically handle the output value mappings (e.g., Cost Center → "CC"), they are typically more complex and less granular than field overrides for simple value changes.
Integration Attributes: Correct for configuring the retention policy (e.g., changing from 30 to 7 days), as attributes manage integration-wide settings like retention.
Why Not Sufficient?: Integration Maps are overkill for simple field value overrides like the vendor's table, and field-level customization is better handled by Integration Field Overrides for precision and ease.
B . Configure Integration Field Overrides and Configure Integration Field Attributes Integration Field Overrides: Correct for mapping specific field values (e.g., Cost Center → "CC"), as they allow granular control over output formats for individual fields.
Integration Field Attributes: These are less commonly used and typically focus on field-specific properties (e.g., data type, length), not broad integration settings like retention policies. Retention is not managed at the field level, so this is incorrect for the retention requirement.
Why Not Sufficient?: Integration Field Attributes do not handle retention policies, making this option incomplete.
C . Configure Integration Field Overrides and Configure Integration Attributes Integration Field Overrides: Perfect for mapping the vendor's output values (e.g., Cost Center → "CC", Pay Group → "PAY", etc.), as they allow precise control over field-level output formatting.
Integration Attributes: Correct for configuring the retention policy (e.g., changing from 30 to 7 days), as attributes manage integration-wide settings like file retention.
Why Sufficient?: This combination addresses both requirements-field-level output formatting and integration-wide retention policy changes-making it the most accurate choice.
D . Configure Integration Maps and Configure Integration Field Attributes Integration Maps: As explained, these are better for complex transformations, not simple field value overrides like the vendor's table. They could work but are less efficient than field overrides.
Integration Field Attributes: As noted, these do not handle retention policies or broad integration settings, making them incorrect for the retention requirement.
Why Not Sufficient?: This combination fails to address retention effectively and uses Integration Maps when Integration Field Overrides would be more appropriate for the output formatting.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis, the vendor's requirements for output formatting (mapping organization types to specific values) and changing the retention policy (from 30 to 7 days) are best met by:
Integration Field Overrides: To customize the output values for organization types (e.g., Cost Center → "CC") as shown in the table.
Integration Attributes: To adjust the document retention policy from 30 days to 7 days.
質問 # 86
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 a template against < wd:Job_Profile > .
What XPath syntax would be used to select the value of the wd:Job_Code element when the < xsl:value-of > element is placed within the template which matches on < wd:Job_Profile > ?
正解：B
解説：
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:Job_Code
> element. The root template of your XSLT matches on < wd:Get_Job_Profiles_Response > and applies a template to < wd:Job_Profile > . Within this template, you use the < xsl:value-of > element to extract the < wd:Job_Code > 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 are:
* < wd:Job_Profile_Reference > , which contains < wd:ID > elements (e.g., a Job_Profile_ID).
* < wd:Job_Profile_Data > , which contains < wd:Job_Code > with the value Senior_Benefits_Analyst.
The task is to select the value of < wd:Job_Code > (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 < wd:Job_Code > .
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, < wd:Job_Profile > is the parent element, and < wd:Job_Profile_Data > is a direct child containing < wd:Job_Code > . The path wd:Job_Profile/wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:
Job_Code is technically correct in terms of structure, as it follows the hierarchy:
* < wd:Job_Profile > # < wd:Job_Profile_Data > # < wd:Job_Code > .
* However, since the template matches < wd:Job_Profile > , the context node is already < wd:
Job_Profile > . 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 < wd:Job_Profile_Data > based on an attribute named wd:Job_Code. However, examining the XML, < wd:Job_Profile_Data > does not have a wd:Job_Code attribute-it has a child element < wd:Job_Code > 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 < wd:Job_Code > 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 < wd:Job_Profile > ) and navigates to wd:Job_Code. Since the template matches < wd:Job_Profile > , the context node is < wd:
Job_Profile > , and wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code correctly points to the < wd:Job_Code > element within < wd:Job_Profile_Data > . This path is:
* Concise and appropriate for the context.
* Directly selects the value " Senior_Benefits_Analyst " when used with < xsl:value-of > .
* Matches the XML structure, as < wd:Job_Profile_Data > contains < wd:Job_Code > as a child.
* This is the most straightforward and correct option for selecting the < wd:Job_Code > value within the < wd:Job_Profile > template.
* Option D: wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type= ' Job_Profile_ID ' ]
* This XPath navigates to < wd:Job_Profile_Reference > (a child of < wd:Job_Profile > ) and then to < wd:ID > with an attribute wd:type= " 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 XPath wd:Job_Profile_Reference/wd:ID[@wd:type= ' Job_Profile_ID ' ] selects the < wd:ID
> element with wd:type= " Job_Profile_ID " , which has the value " Senior_Benefits_Analyst. " However, this is not the < wd:Job_Code > value-the < wd:Job_Code > is a separate element under < wd:Job_Profile_Data > , not < wd:Job_Profile_Reference > . The question specifically asks for the < wd:Job_Code > 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 < wd:Job_Profile > (as the template matches this element) and navigates to < wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code > , which directly selects the < wd:Job_Code > 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 < wd:Job_Profile_Data > is a child of < wd:Job_Profile > and contains < wd:Job_Code > as a child.
* When used with < xsl:value-of select= " wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code " / > 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
< xsl:template match= " wd:Job_Profile " >
< xsl:value-of select= " wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code " / >
< /xsl:template >
This would output " Senior_Benefits_Analyst " for the < wd:Job_Code > 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 < wd:Job_Profile_Data > as the container for job profile details, including < wd:
Job_Code > . The guide emphasizes using relative XPath paths within templates to navigate from the matched element (e.g., < wd:Job_Profile > ) to child elements like < wd:Job_Profile_Data/wd:Job_Code > .
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 < wd:Job_Profile_Data > and < wd:Job_Code > .
* 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 < wd:Job_Profile > 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 < wd:Job_Code > value using the appropriate XPath syntax within the < wd:Job_Profile > template context.
質問 # 87
What is the task used to upload a new XSLT file for a pre-existing document transformation integration system?
正解：C
質問 # 88
This is the XML file generated from a Core Connector; Positions integration.
When performing an XSLT Transformation on the Core Connector: Positions XML output file, you want to show a hyperlink of positions that are not available for hiring as an entry in the Message tab.
What are all the needed ETV items to meet the above requirements?
正解：C
解説：
In Workday integrations, the Extension for Transformation and Validation (ETV) framework is used within XSLT transformations to apply validation and formatting rules to XML data, such as the output from a Core Connector (e.g., Positions integration). In this scenario, you need to perform an XSLT transformation on the Core Connector: Positions XML output file to display a hyperlink for positions that are not available for hiring as an entry in the Message tab. This requires configuring ETV attributes to ensure the data is present and correctly targeted for the hyperlink.
Here's why option B is correct:
* Requirement Analysis: The requirement specifies showing a hyperlink for positions " not available for hiring. " In the provided XML, the ps:Available_For_Hire field under ps:Position_Data indicates whether a position is available for hire (e.g., < ps:Available_For_Hire > true < /ps:Available_For_Hire
> ). For positions where this is false, you need to create a message (hyperlink) in the Message tab, which typically requires linking to a Workday ID (WID) or other identifier.
* ETV Attributes:
* etv:required= " true " : This ensures that the ps:WID value under ps:Additional_Information is mandatory for the transformation. If the WID is missing, the transformation will fail or generate an error, ensuring that the hyperlink can be created only for valid positions with an associated WID.
* etv:target= " [ps:Additional_Information/ps:WID] " : This specifies that the target of the transformation (e.g., the hyperlink) should be the WID value found at ps:Additional_Information
/ps:WID in the XML. This WID can be used to construct a hyperlink to the position in Workday, meeting the requirement to show a hyperlink for positions not available for hiring.
* Context in XML: The XML shows ps:Additional_Information containing ps:WID (e.g., < ps:WID >
73bd4d8562e04b1820f55818467905b < /ps:WID > ), which is a unique identifier for the position. By targeting this WID with etv:target, you ensure the hyperlink points to the correct position record in Workday when ps:Available_For_Hire is false.
Why not the other options?
* A.
* etv:minLength= " 0 "
* etv:targetWID= " [ps:Additional_Information/ps:WID] "
* etv:minLength= " 0 " allows the WID to be empty or have zero length, which contradicts the need for a valid WID to create a hyperlink. It does not ensure the data is present, making it unsuitable.
Additionally, etv:targetWID is not a standard ETV attribute; the correct attribute is etv:target, making this option incorrect.
* C.
* etv:minLength= " 0 "
* etv:target= " [ps:Additional_Information/ps:WID] "
* Similar to option A, etv:minLength= " 0 " allows the WID to be empty, which does not meet the requirement for a mandatory WID to create a hyperlink. This makes it incorrect, as the hyperlink would fail if the WID is missing.
* D.
* etv:required= " true "
* etv:targetWID= " [ps:Additional_Information/ps:WID] "
* While etv:required= " true " ensures the WID is present, etv:targetWID is not a standard ETV attribute. The correct attribute is etv:target, making this option syntactically incorrect and unsuitable for the transformation.
To implement this in XSLT for a Workday integration:
* Use the ETV attributes from option B (etv:required= " true " and etv:target= " [ps:
Additional_Information/ps:WID] " ) within your XSLT template to validate and target the ps:WID for positions where ps:Available_For_Hire is false. This ensures the transformation generates a valid hyperlink in the Message tab, linking to the position's WID in Workday.
Workday Pro Integrations Study Guide: Section on " ETV in XSLT Transformations " - Details the use of ETV attributes like required and target for validating and targeting data in Workday XML, including handling identifiers like WID for hyperlinks.
Workday Core Connector and EIB Guide: Chapter on " XML Transformations " - Explains how to use ETV attributes in XSLT to process position data, including creating messages or hyperlinks based on conditions like Available_For_Hire.
Workday Integration System Fundamentals: Section on " ETV for Message Generation " - Covers applying ETV attributes to generate hyperlinks in the Message tab, ensuring data integrity and correct targeting of Workday identifiers like WID.
質問 # 89
What is the relationship between an ISU (Integration System User) and an ISSG (Integration System Security Group)?
正解：A
解説：
This question explores the relationship between an Integration System User (ISU) and an Integration System Security Group (ISSG) in Workday Pro Integrations, focusing on how security is structured for integrations.
Let's analyze the relationship and evaluate each option to determine the correct answer.
Understanding ISU and ISSG in Workday
* Integration System User (ISU):An ISU is a dedicated user account in Workday specifically designed for integrations. It acts as a "robot account" or service account, used by integration systems to interact with Workday via APIs, web services, or other integration mechanisms (e.g., EIBs, Core Connectors).
ISUs are typically configured with a username, password, and specific security settings, such as disabling UI sessions and setting session timeouts to prevent expiration (commonly set to 0 minutes).
ISUs are not human users but are instead programmatic accounts for automated processes.
* Integration System Security Group (ISSG):An ISSG is a security container or group in Workday that defines the permissions and access rights for integration systems. ISSGs are used to manage what data and functionalities an integration (or its associated ISU) can access or modify within Workday. There are two types of ISSGs:
* Unconstrained:Allows access to all data instances secured by the group.
* Constrained:Limits access to a subset of data instances based on context (e.g., specific segments or data scopes).ISSGs are configured with domain security policies, granting permissions like
"Get" (read), "Put" (write), "View," or "Modify" for specific domains (e.g., Worker Data, Integration Build).
* Relationship Between ISU and ISSG:In Workday, security for integrations is managed through a hierarchical structure. An ISU is associated with or assigned to an ISSG to inherit its permissions. The ISSG acts as the security policy container, defining what the ISU can do, while the ISU is the account executing those actions. This relationship ensures that integrations have controlled, audited access to Workday data and functions, adhering to the principle of least privilege.
Evaluating Each Option
Let's assess each option based on Workday's security model for integrations:
Option A: The ISU is a member of the ISSG.
* Analysis:This is correct. In Workday, an ISU is assigned to or associated with an ISSG to gain the necessary permissions. The ISSG serves as a security group that contains one or more ISUs, granting them access to specific domains and functionalities. For example, when creating an ISU, you use the
"Create Integration System User" task, and then assign it to an ISSG via the "Assign Integration System Security Groups" or "Maintain Permissions for Security Group" tasks. Multiple ISUs can belong to the same ISSG, inheriting its permissions. This aligns with Workday's security framework, where security groups (like ISSGs) manage user (or ISU) access.
* Why It Fits:The ISU is a "member" of the ISSG in the sense that it is linked to the group to receive its permissions, enabling secure integration operations. This is a standard practice for managing integration security in Workday.
Option B: The ISU owns the ISSG.
* Analysis:This is incorrect. In Workday, ISUs do not "own" ISSGs. Ownership or control of security groups is not a concept applicable to ISUs, which are service accounts for integrations, not administrative entities with authority over security structures. ISSGs are created and managed by Workday administrators or security professionals using tasks like "Create Security Group" and
"Maintain Permissions for Security Group." The ISU is simply a user account assigned to the ISSG, not its owner or controller.
* Why It Doesn't Fit:Ownership implies administrative control, which ISUs lack; they are designed for execution, not management of security groups.
Option C: The ISU grants security policies to the ISSG.
* Analysis:This is incorrect. ISUs do not have the authority to grant or modify security policies for ISSGs. Security policies are defined and assigned to ISSGs by Workday administrators or security roles with appropriate permissions (e.g., Security Configuration domain access). ISUs are passive accounts that execute integrations based on the permissions granted by the ISSG they are assigned to. Granting permissions is an administrative function, not an ISU capability.
* Why It Doesn't Fit:ISUs are integration accounts, not security administrators, so they cannot modify or grant policies to ISSGs.
Option D: The ISU controls what accounts are in the ISSG.
* Analysis:This is incorrect. ISUs do not control membership or configuration of ISSGs. Adding or removing accounts (including other ISUs) from an ISSG is an administrative task performed by users with security configuration permissions, using tasks like "Maintain Permissions for Security Group." ISUs are limited to executing integration tasks based on their assigned ISSG permissions, not managing group membership.
* Why It Doesn't Fit:ISUs lack the authority to manage ISSG membership or structure, as they are not administrative accounts but integration-specific service accounts.
Final Verification
Based on Workday's security model, the correct relationship is that an ISU is a member of an ISSG, inheriting its permissions to perform integration tasks. This is consistent with the principle of least privilege, where ISSGs define access, and ISUs execute within those boundaries. The other options misattribute administrative or ownership roles to ISUs, which are not supported by Workday's design.
Supporting Information
The relationship is grounded in Workday's integration security practices, including:
* Creating an ISU via the "Create Integration System User" task.
* Creating an ISSG via the "Create Security Group" task, selecting "Integration System Security Group (Unconstrained)" or "Constrained."
* Assigning the ISU to the ISSG using tasks like "Assign Integration System Security Groups" or
"Maintain Permissions for Security Group."
* Configuring domain security policies (e.g., Get, Put) for the ISSG to control ISU access to domains like Worker Data, Integration Build, etc.
* Activating security changes via "Activate Pending Security Policy Changes." This structure ensures secure, controlled access for integrations, with ISSGs acting as the permission container and ISUs as the executing accounts.
Key References
The explanation aligns with Workday Pro Integrations documentation and best practices, including:
* Integration security overviews and training on Workday Community.
* Guides for creating ISUs and ISSGs in implementation documentation (e.g., NetIQ, Microsoft Learn, Reco.ai).
* Tutorials on configuring domain permissions and security groups for integrations (e.g., ServiceNow, Apideck, Surety Systems).
質問 # 90
......
Workday-Pro-Integrations試験に問題がある場合は、無料のデモを検討してください。弊社の最新のWorkday-Pro-Integrations試験トレントは、この業界では完璧な模範であり、さまざまな程度の試験受験者向けの明確なコンテンツに満ちています。最新のWorkday-Pro-Integrations試験トレントの結果は驚くほど驚くべきもので、試験受験者の98％以上が目標を無事に達成しました。また、Workday-Pro-Integrationsテストダンプにより、あらゆる種類の教材の精度が非常に高いことが保証されました。
Workday-Pro-Integrations基礎訓練: https://www.pass4test.jp/Workday-Pro-Integrations.html
さらに、Pass4Test Workday-Pro-Integrationsダンプの一部が現在無料で提供されています：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1h4otYl6JtjrYemkiYsZmkKp7lklAJY5h