I think there are a number of reasons why librarian response has been muted. Like the others, I think its because of the question you asked: “Who are the librarians of the future?” At the risk of over-generalizing, librarians tend to think of the progressions of their field as occurring through organizations as opposed to through individuals. There’s no ‘i’ in library, so to speak.
That being said, I know a number of “librarians for the future”. One of them is Dan Chudnov, who – with others – developed the COinS convention to embed bibliographic metadata in HTML. He is also responsible for unAPI which I believe you are already familiar with. I particularly am fond of his credo: help people build their own libraries.
Another reason perhaps why there hasn’t been as much response as you had hoped is that libraries are grappling with their futures in their own constituencies. We are sadly feudal bunch in many ways. But that doesn’t mean we are indifferent to our future. For my own library-territory (academic libraries in Ontario, Canada), I helped write a report on developing a better platform for research needs called Scholr 2.0
Like William Gibson sort of said, the work towards the future library is here – its just not evenly distributed. Or, in this case, concentrated.
PMR: Thanks. I used the word “librarian” as well as library because of an initial suggestion from the blogosphere. It also helped to make it more personal and to highlight the fact that indivdiuals could make their own contribution.
I am not familiar with COinS or unAPI. Wikpedia has nothing on the former and any entries on unAPI are 18 months old, so is it used? I am a typical person who knows nothing in today’s world unless it’s thrust upon them. I spent a little time (<= 5 mins, my maximum) on both sites but couldn't get a grip on either. That either means they aren't being used or, if they are and are successful, need more marketing to expose them. It's not easy, but it's necessary.