Re: Participants without roles, roles without behaviour

Hi

At the moment I don't believe it is possible to define a role without a 
behavior - although the behavior does not need to define an interface.

However, I agree that in situations where a role is only acting as a 
client then the behavior is irrelevant.

Martin/Steve - should this be raised as an implementation issue?

Regards
Gary


Matthew Rawlings wrote:
> I followed your advice and turned each of my Participants into Roles. I
> still have the problem I am not permitted to define Roles without behaviour.
> How can I explicitly state a Role does not have behaviour?
>
> Matthew Rawlings
> +44 791 539 7824
>
>
>
>
>
>
>