UMLR — Description of the OCL on Actor does not match OCL and both are obsolete.

The description of the OCL on an Actor limits associations to Use Cases, Components, and Classes. However, the OCL limits it to Use Cases and Classes, forbids behavior, and doesn’t explicitly mention Components.

a. I assume that Components are types of Classes, but Behavior is generally not a class (it’s a classifier), so I wonder why the limitation on behavior is needed?

b. Wouldn’t this allow an Actor to have an attribute/part that is typed by a class?

c. Isn’t this entire restriction obsolete? We don’t seem to be insisting that actors are outside of the subject anymore, almost all modeling approaches, allow for actors to be full design elements within a system. This is necessary to support multiple layers of system analysis, so that at one level some of the parts of a system become actors to other parts when modeled at the level. Requiring the modeling to introduce redundant elements to represent actors that are part of the higher-level system seems inappropriate.