Nav Dev Questions

aman_mbs

Dear All,

I have few question which my friend faced during his certification and i to confused with them please help me out 2 answer...

1) User entering a general journal what are the dimension data flows. (2 Questions on this)
T Default Dimension
U Journal Dimension
V Dimension Ledger
X Production Order Dimension
Y Document Dimension
Z Posted Document Dimension

2) Wich of the followings is Not characteristic of a menu suite?
a-)it consist of a set of menu
b-)A menu item is the highest level in the tree
c-)A menu node can be either a menugroup or menusuite
d-)A menu group contain a collection of menu nodes

3-) Which of the following functional area has more than one Master Table?
a-)General Ledger
b-)Fixed Assets
c-)Inventory
d-)Sales & receivables

4-) Report with cusomer and cust.ledger entry as dataitems and cust ledger entry indented under customer. which of time following would be easiest way to filter both tables to the same date range

a)use SETRANGE on prereport
b)add datefilter to the ReqFilterFields property of the customer dataitem
and link the posting date field of the cust.ledger entry dataitem to the Date filter field of the customer table using the dataitemlink property
c)add datefilter to the ReqFilterFields property of the customer dataitem and,use the set SETFILTER cmd to Filter the posting date field cust.led.entry
d)use SETFILTER on predataitem

5-)Which of the following is not true regarding the methods and properties of an Automation server controlled from C/SIDE? //akg
a-)When the Automation variable is properly declared, you can view the methods and properties using the C/AL symbol menu
b-)Certain methods and properties will not be able to utilized in navision if there is no corresponding data type within navision
c-)knowledge of the relationship between COM data typesand navision data types is required
d-)Com data type can be converted to Navision data types using alterdatatype in order for an outside application.

6-)The main limititation of dataport as a tool to integrate Navision with an outside application, is that requires the outside application to; //akg
a-)Intiate all data transfers from itself to Navision by running the dataport
b-)be certified as Navision complicant
c-)place its data into an ASCII file before the navision dataport can read
d-)know internal data structure of the navision tables to be updated by the dataport

7)Which of the following is Not true regarding XML tagname field //akg
a-)Attributes are entered prior to the elements they define
b-)TagNames must be entered in order
c-)parent elements must precede their child elements
d-)child elements are indented

8-)you are designing a report that is going to be run while other users are inserting records into the same transaction tables, using version based navision server what do you need to do t the report to make sure that the data reported will be a consistent snapshot of the data those transactions
a-)you don't need to anything
b-)you will need to set the transaction type property to SnapShot
c-)you will need to set the transaction type property to Browse
d-)there is nothing you can do. user will just have to tell all the others


9-)Which of the following is true regarding to Automation Sever?
a-)C/Side can receive events from components with the Automation events=yes
b-)C/Side cannot receive events from outside components
c-)C/Side can only receive Com+ components
d-)C/Side can receive ebents from components with the withevents=yes

10) Look the following code:
VarRecord.field1 := ‘xyz’;
VarRecord.modify();
When the change is submitted ?

a) a submit is implicitly called after the modify
b) when leaving the trigger
c) modify submit the transaction <=
d)…

Thanks & Regards,

kapil4dynamics

Surprising is the memory of your friend man :shock: . Awesome he remembers options as well.

kriki

[Topic moved from 'NAV/Navision' forum to 'NAV Exams & Certification' forum]

BTW : you should pass NAV because you learned it and got experience, NOT because you copied the questions from others.

rdebath

kriki wrote:

BTW : you should pass NAV because you learned it and got experience, NOT because you copied the questions from others.

Nope, wrong sorry. These Microsoft exams are written by people who have the manual open in front of them not by people who known their subject. If you know the subject you might pass if the manual was good, the Navision ones are generally better than many. If you want to be sure to pass you have to have memorised the manual they used to create the exam, errors and all, and know what strained phrasing the exam writer has used to convert bald statements in the manual into questions that don't give away the answers.

This gets really obvious when there are glaring mistakes in the manual or they've tried to make too many questions from a very simple part of the manual. All in all it's better to actually learn Navision and just "Brain dump" the exam, cause in the real world if the exam was any good past papers wouldn't be a threat to it.

PS: I pass Navison exams first time with 90%+ the reason for the missed questions are normally "WTF does that question mean" or questions where the real right answer is "none of the above" so I have to guess the mistake!

DenSter

rdebath wrote:

Nope, wrong sorry. These Microsoft exams are written by people who have the manual open in front of them not by people who known their subject.

I can tell you from personal experience that this is false information. Microsoft does everything they can to get SME's involved when they compile their manuals and exams, they don't just slap them together.

While I agree that there have been some unexplained errors in past exams, to simply dismiss them altogether is just not right. If you study the material, and you know the subject from practice and experience, you WILL pass the test. You said you scored 90% by studying the material, I would say that is an excellent score, well done. So what if there is a "WTF is this" question in there, you can't know everything.

matttrax

DenSter wrote:

So what if there is a "WTF is this" question in there, you can't know everything.

Exactly. Think back to all those tests you took in high school and college and how often you saw a question that was mentioned in one sentence of one lecture. There are always some, but that doesn't keep you from studying the material in an effort to pass.

The point is to understand the concepts and apply them to what you're doing. No one looks at Codeunit 80, for example, for the first time and immediately understands it. But if you understand how conditional statements, records, and loops work, you can piece it together and figure it out.

rdebath wrote:

If you want to be sure to pass you have to have memorised the manual they used to create the exam

See, you said it yourself...if you want to pass, you have to study the material. Sometimes there are errors in that material, but if you know what you're studying, I guarantee those errors won't make you fail the test.

rdebath

DenSter wrote:

So what if there is a "WTF is this" question in there, you can't know everything.

You have the wrong end there; once I worked out what the tortured sentence in the question means I DO know the stuff. But if I have to go back to the manual to find the exact sentence that they've used in the manual to create the question the question is a failure.

It's this sort of failure of the question that past papers, AKA "brain dumps" are supposed to reduce or even prevent.

matttrax wrote:

I guarantee those errors won't make you fail the test.

Actually, that's not so. Admittedly it doesn't seem to happen with the Microsoft Navision tests, but it does happen with others. I think the example was one of the Microsoft SQL tests, where, basically if you knew the wrong manual you would fail the test because the 'right' manual was stating lots of opinions as facts so the tests were assuming the wrong answers. Once you get the right manual the test is easy, but all you're learning from the new book is the opinions for the test.

DenSter wrote:

You said you scored 90% by studying the material

That's the Navision tests and no I didn't do any studying at all I just knew Navision inside out for a couple of years before I needed to do these tests. That's kinda the point, why those questions stuck in my memory, I knew when the answers were all wrong and I knew when the question made no sense. And I knew enough to guess the right wrong answer in some places because I knew where the manual was technically right but misleading and things like that.

DenSter wrote:

I can tell you from personal experience that this is false information. Microsoft does everything they can to get SME's involved when they compile their manuals and exams, they don't just slap them together.

Okay, it's been a few years since I last needed to do any Microsoft tests so I will assume they have got better. Despite having a report a couple of months ago about a question about the form wizard that asked which code it put in the form by default (there was no 'none' option).

But, this doesn't change the fact that past papers are one of the core parts of the exam process for "real" exams and any "exam" where such documentation actually defeats the test is worthless in the opinion of many. So when I'm actually taking a test I like to assume it's actually worth something, therefore there's nothing wrong with seeing copies of questions and answers.

DenSter

Well you raise a whole bunch of interesting points about examinations in general, which could lead to a lengthy discussion, preferably done with a few cold ones on the table

Exams are meant to measure your proficiency in a certain topic, which is defined by the details contained in the training material for that particular topic. The only way to do this in a fair way is to make sure that what is in the exam questions is also in the training material. If there is one thing that I can't stand is an exam that has a question/answer that is contradicted in the training material, I don't care how much better that question/answer is. We can argue until the cows come home about what makes good training material (not to mention that you can "solve" a "problem" in more than one, perfectly legitimate, way), which is also best discussed while enjoying a cold one 8), but the fact remains that you have to have a connection between the training material and the exam.

Let's just shortcut this whole thing and agree that braindumps are indeed a valuabe resource to prepare for exams, as long as they are solely used as complementary resource. Let's also agree that your primary source for actual knowledge and skills have to come from training material (for certification purposes) and experience (to become a more successful professional), and that people who prepare for exams and get their certification only by memorizing braindumps are big fat no good louzy stinking cheaters

kapil4dynamics

I know only one thing about this. It's a never ending topic But yeah people who do exam by their own means not by cheating but by studying , they have 100% more chances of cashing it.

Joe_Mathis

I used to do instructing, and we maintained a test question bank. After every examination we had to run a test item analysis to determine whether or not we had WTF type questions. If everyone was getting the question right all of the time or if no one was getting the answers then we had to look at the question and the course materials. If the question didn't make sense then we would re-vamp it, if the course materials didn't cover it well enough we would add it to the course.

This is where the rub comes in. With the internet being what it is, the test bank would get depleted quickly because some people will post the questions and now everyone gets it right.

The development exam used to require a coding piece where you would actually do a development and it would get graded. They dropped this requirement to make it easier to get a license and to reduce the hours it took to actually grade the exam (reducing their cost of giving the exam).

So now you have to throw in some WTF type questions that people who understand what is needed will be able to figure out and the rest will scratch their heads, just to keep the exam viable. Personally I would rather that we go back to a mandatory class and then sit the exam after it. Sure it is one more expense for the partner, but at least ONE person at a partner would actually have been trained and not just studied a test bank.

I am glad that you scored well, and wish you no ill will. I also think that as you have figured out some of the WTF type questions that you will be a capable developer.

I just wonder how many licensed developers are out there that couldn't pass the old exam.

bbrown

I remember that old take the course and the exam method. That's was how I did my original NAV developer certification. But also in those Pre-MS days, Navision didn't treat training and certification as a profit center. They invested in the process along with the partner by providing free classroom training and exams. The partner still had the expense of travel and the lost billable time.

When I started in this business, one of my first certifications was a Novell CNE (yes, I've been at this for a while). Acquiring this certification involved passing a handful of exams (5 or 6 if I recall) much like some MS certifications. And like today there was lots of "brain dump" materials available. But then after passing all the test, you had to provide 3 customer references to get your certificate. Of course, over time Novell dropped this requirement and began turning out what came to be know as the "paper CNE".

DenSter

bbrown wrote:

But also in those Pre-MS days, Navision didn't treat training and certification as a profit center. They invested in the process along with the partner by providing free classroom training and exams. The partner still had the expense of travel and the lost billable time.

They could afford to do that, because Navision used to charge partners 15% of their service revenue. You better believe they got paid for this one way or another.

I do agree that the way of examination was superior. I took my training in Toronto, and it was 2 weeks well spent. Developing that solution during the last day of training was a lot of fun

bbrown

DenSter wrote:

bbrown wrote:

But also in those Pre-MS days, Navision didn't treat training and certification as a profit center. They invested in the process along with the partner by providing free classroom training and exams. The partner still had the expense of travel and the lost billable time.

They could afford to do that, because Navision used to charge partners 15% of their service revenue. You better believe they got paid for this one way or another.

I do agree that the way of examination was superior. I took my training in Toronto, and it was 2 weeks well spent. Developing that solution during the last day of training was a lot of fun

I remember that revenue sharing part. It was another way that Navision more of a partner and not just a vendor. At the prior company I worked at (pre NAV), a lot of our business was taking over and cleaning up orphaned accounts. These were products whose vendors tended to look only at you box sales. It was always interesting to notice that the partners getting all the annual "sales awards" were also the ones that we were getting many of our orphaned clients from. Our services revenue tended to outpace our software revenue. When the company became a NAV partner the policy you mention recognized the value of that.

search1110

My guess is you are not professional or you did not try to pass exam. any experienced pro in Navision will say: This exams are ABSOLUTELY useless for professionals. Maybe 5% knowlage from it you can use, maybe less. I knew many guys who passes exams with about 90%
but still know nothing and can do very little to create something more or less good in navision. On the other hand I know many who did not pass and are genious and created a lot of usefull and clever stuff in Navision. So you are both populist saying that or just an amature!!!
Relax and go get more posters for your wall.

DenSter wrote:

rdebath wrote:

Nope, wrong sorry. These Microsoft exams are written by people who have the manual open in front of them not by people who known their subject.

I can tell you from personal experience that this is false information. Microsoft does everything they can to get SME's involved when they compile their manuals and exams, they don't just slap them together.

While I agree that there have been some unexplained errors in past exams, to simply dismiss them altogether is just not right. If you study the material, and you know the subject from practice and experience, you WILL pass the test. You said you scored 90% by studying the material, I would say that is an excellent score, well done. So what if there is a "WTF is this" question in there, you can't know everything.

Joe_Mathis

2 1/2 year old post.

Let it go....