[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by Robbie1702

How does the action mean two different things...?! If you read p.28 of the Omnifocus handbook - look at the "waiting" example: “get annotated pterodactyl brochure draft back from Dennis”. What is suggested there, is that I create another context (example > create a Waiting : Dennis context) although the context actually still is "Dennis".

No, "Waiting : Dennis" is a separate context. If you don't have the option set in your preferences to display the full hierarchical name, it may look like it is the same as your "Agenda : Dennis" context, but it is most certainly a separate context.

I'm not changing context so why create another one?! That's just extra work and unproductive. It would be easier to -just like an "on hold" marker- mark it as waiting (!). Otherwise how many unnecessary contexts do I start creating (that would be every calls/people/email context double!!!)

You probably don't need a calls context for each person you are going to call. Typically one might have a Calls context that serves as a catch-all for calls to be made (the physical constraint being that you need a means for making calls), and possibly an Agenda context for interactions where the other person or group needs to be present.

You can't be serious about the multiple actions here... =D Waiting is a state, not a second action. And for sure it isn't a GTD context. If it is please enlighten me, if not, why is the GTD-true Omnifocus treating it like one?

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley :-)

DA speaks of "waiting for" lists all over the place in Getting Things Done. You call Fred and tell him that you need him to send you his report. That's an action. Fred needs to actually send you the report. That's another action. The OmniFocus structure allows you to track that in the project instead of in a list over on the side, in much the same way that it gives you lists of Next Actions.

I am no programmer, and I cannot judge whether the implementation is trivial or not. However, doesn't it seem like code just needs to be copied from the "On hold" function and altered slightly (plus the exclamation mark logo design)?

As I previously opined, I don't think this is a trivial change in 1.x, though as Dennis reminds me, Omni has mentioned reworking the model in 2.0, allowing for putting individual actions on hold. However, Ken, Omni's CEO, recently commented that they've just stopped taking 2.0 apart, and haven't started putting it all back together again, so you should probably count on doing a fair amount of work without that feature before you get it...there's still at least 1 more 1.x release in the pipeline before 2.0.