Thanks for the replies guys.
I felt that this is too much of details (which is very likely to change because and has little to do with architecture) for an architecture.
In the end it didn't spoil my fun, today I've got "passed" email today.
Sharing my experience (hm, list tag doesn't seem to work for me):
[*]I don't have any architect experience
[*]Cade's book (the 2010 one) was my most valuable asset, for taking ALL parts of the exam. It was the only book that I've fully read (well, I skipped through the UML part). If you don't get what
pattern is about, it's better to work out a sample code for yourself and realize it, than read, cough, books by Fowler and the likes IMO. (writing entire books about refactoring? seriously?)
[*]Passed part 1 with 83 or 87% (don't remember exactly)
[*]Took part 3, didn't write much (don't think it was right though) A number of answers was a bit messy, didn't mention all of patterns I've used, wrote wrong info about what kind of EJBs was used for what, answered that I use JPA to the question about "persistence strategy" (oh dear).
[*]Sent my assignment a bit more than one week after taking part
[*]Had only about 20 classes (besides JSPs) in class diagram. Most my diagrams looked quite similar to that of Cade. Mentioned only a couple of patterns in notes on class diagram. (just one
word like "Composite" or "ValueListHandler details skipped"). Wrote only 2 sentences as foreword, mentioning that backing beans are used, and what kind of restriction apply to them (no a.b.c.omg.so.deep property references etc)
[*]All my diagrams were on the same HTML page, with table of content links on the top, and titles / "back to top" links next to each diagram.
[*]Didn't use gazillion of "uses" strings, IMO it only makes it harder to read, without providing with any kind of useful info
[*]All diagrams would fit on the same page, design comments / "Author of this page is" and boxes had different colors.
[*]Only used StarUML
[*]Used stereotypes to describe what will be a
EJB of what sort
[*]Class/Component Diagrams were very concise in regards to relations between objects, who uses whom, who belongs to whom.
[*]In general, always kept in mind that I don't want to annoy the guy who'll check it on the one hand, and he/she should clearly see what where why on the high level.
PS
The confusing part is " Certification Account Address Validation" afterwards. What is a "site number"/ Which registration number? Heck, "test date" of which part?
Sent email to prometric...