Thanks, Geert, for the explanation of the status coloring (and again for the other help you gave me).
And also thanks to PeterHeitz for the (partial

) agreement.
Regarding the diagram as a requirement element I can't agree. E. g. an use case diagram is an 'official' way to represent a customer requirement. Why should I place an use case diagram if I additionally have to write a text requirement that describes the same issue? If I did that I would have to edit both in parallel in the case of changes, which is a serious source of errors and inconsistencies. Am I wrong here?
Of course the use case will result in several functional requirements in a latter stage of developing the architecture of a system. Since these have a dependency relationship to the use case diagram they can (and have to) be changed when the use case has changed.
On the other hand e. g. an activity diagram is part of the modeling. In my opinion it should be able here to set a status to represent the state of completion or development from a kind of 'draft' up to the finished and fixed state that tells the developer(s) that the can start to implement this activity.