Which asset-related implementation requirements must be addressed during assessment? (Choose two)

Question

Options

• AMigration of asset renditions
• BUser training for asset tagging
• CCompatibility of asset metadata
• DCreation of new templates for asset delivery

• A
  74% (31)
• B
  7% (3)
• D
  19% (8)

Explanation

During an assessment phase of an implementation, migration of asset renditions (A) must be addressed because existing renditions (thumbnails, resized versions, alternate formats) need to be transferred or regenerated in the new system - failing to plan this causes broken experiences post-launch. Compatibility of asset metadata (C) is equally critical because metadata schemas, custom fields, and taxonomies must map correctly between systems; incompatible metadata means assets become unsearchable or misclassified.

B is wrong because user training, while important, is an adoption/change management concern - not an assessment-phase implementation requirement. D is wrong because creating new delivery templates is a design/build activity, not something assessed during the evaluation of what needs to be migrated or validated.

Memory tip: Think "what breaks silently if you ignore it?" - Renditions and Metadata both fail invisibly (missing images, broken search), making them assessment priorities. Training and templates are visible deliverables you can address later in the project lifecycle.

No community discussion yet for this question.