Refer to the following scenario to answer the question below.

Comprehensive and Detailed 150 to 250 words of Explanation From Workday Record-to-Report/Course Guide/topics:

Journal sequence generator IDs are applied when journals post, so the posted journals are the controlling dependency when a company needs to revise the sequence rule for the current ledger year. Because journals have already posted under the original rule, the company must first unpost every journal in that ledger year. This removes the posted-journal dependency and makes the affected sequence generators eligible for the controlled maintenance needed before the revised rule can be used.

After unposting, the company can remove unused generator IDs as applicable, update the journal sequence generator rule with the new condition, create the required generators again, and repost the journals so that numbering follows the revised configuration. The Mass Delete Journal Sequence Generator IDs task alone is not sufficient because it cannot delete identifiers that remain associated with posted journals. Closing the remaining periods also does not resolve the existing posted transactions or rebuild their sequence. Option C is therefore too absolute: the sequence can be changed for the current year, but only after the posted journals that depend on the original generator setup are unposted. Accordingly, D identifies the essential first action. This procedure preserves Workday's sequencing controls while allowing the updated condition to govern the journals when they are reposted.

Official Workday reference: Workday - Configure Journal Sequence Generator Rules ; topics: sequence generator lifespan, posted journals, and changes to journal sequencing.

===============