Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Adobe Exam AD0-E134 Topic 7 Question 43 Discussion

Actual exam question for Adobe's AD0-E134 exam
Question #: 43
Topic #: 7
[All AD0-E134 Questions]

AEM SPA integration provides various design models. In an application the developer chooses to use AEM as a headless CMS without using the SPA Editor SDK framework.

What would be an advantage for this design model?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

For AEM as a Cloud Service, the correct format to use for OSGi configuration files is .cfg.json. This format is specifically designed for use in AEM as a Cloud Service and supports both structured and unstructured data, making it versatile for various configuration needs.

Steps to create and deploy OSGi configurations in .cfg.json format:

Create Configuration File: Create a .cfg.json file in your codebase, typically under the apps directory, for example:

/apps/myproject/config/org.apache.sling.commons.log.LogManager.cfg.json

Define Configuration: Add your configuration properties in JSON format:

{

'org.apache.sling.commons.log.level': 'debug',

'org.apache.sling.commons.log.file': 'logs/error.log'

}

Deploy to AEM: Deploy the configuration along with your code package to AEM as a Cloud Service. The configuration will be applied automatically.


AEM as a Cloud Service - OSGi Configuration

Contribute your Thoughts:

Iola
18 days ago
You know, I'm just picturing a content author trying to edit my code and accidentally deleting the entire app. Option B it is, no exceptions! Though I might have to install a moat and a drawbridge around my dev environment, just to be safe.
upvoted 0 times
...
Emily
21 days ago
Wait, there's a 'template editor' for the SPA? That's news to me. I guess option C would be the way to go if I want to keep the content team happy. Though I'd probably need to invest in a crystal ball to predict their needs.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ligia
1 months ago
Aha, I see what they're getting at. Option D sounds like the perfect compromise - I get to keep my dev freedom while still letting the content team do their thing in a controlled environment. Brilliant!
upvoted 0 times
...
Naomi
2 months ago
But wouldn't it limit the content author's ability to edit the app easily?
upvoted 0 times
...
Ligia
2 months ago
I agree, it gives the developer full control over the app.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacki
2 months ago
Hmm, option B seems like the way to go. Who needs those pesky content authors mucking around with my code anyway? I'll keep them out of my app if it's the last thing I do!
upvoted 0 times
Erin
27 days ago
D) The developer keeps control over the app by only enabling authoring in restricted areas of the app
upvoted 0 times
...
Tatum
1 months ago
B) The developer has full control over the app.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eliseo
1 months ago
A) The content author can edit the app using AEM's content authoring experience.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Vonda
2 months ago
I think using AEM as a headless CMS without the SPA Editor SDK framework is a good idea.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel