...there are still some regrettable details.
So if someone finds something on a 'to the marketplace' search, how can we make it as easy as possible (one click or less) for the person to figure out how the library can get that thing they found into their hands (licensed electronic copy, ILL, book on the shelves, other)? Cause that definitely is something that's our responsibility, and it's difficult to do without some level of cooperation (or good API's not specifically targetted at us, but just generally good and flexible) with the search provider.
Not sure I can help with the less than one click bit, but WorldCat comes pretty close to what you're asking for, but the user does NOT have to be an OCLC member to take advantage of this. The library does, of course, but is it so unreasonable, if one wants libraries to act in a global way, to expect them to participate in a global consortium? Others can answer this better than I, but it was my impression that libraries who are exposed in WorldCat are happy with the results -- more traffic.
Once you find out where the item is, whether you can get it with a click, or have it delivered to you is a matter of the perogatives and wherewithal of the particular library. I know there have been trials with on-demand-delivery of paper... I don't know whether this has resulted in an economically sustainable service, but again, thats a decision for each local organization to make. I suspect there is room for a consortial delivery service in this space, but it is probably dependent on geographic considerations.
If you're still reading, you've probably sputtered "But WorldCat isn't Google search, and no one but the saved (librarians) knows about it!" Perhaps, and thats a huge part of the problem that I don't see an easy fix for. There are WorldCat links in Google, but you can spend a lot time looking for them (appending "worldcat" to a search works, but not likely anyone is going to do THAT).
Libraries are just too small a part of the information ecosystem to either manage this themselves, or to get enough of Google's attention and effort to make it happen from within the universe of their business model. Just because something SHOULD work a certain way (from a public perspective) doesn't mean that there is a business model that will support it working that way. Jonathan's comments, if I interpret them correctly, seem to agree that this is the case (they are worth reading if your concerns are convergent with this issue).
Some of you here have had ideas about how to make information more accessible to people, and many of those ideas have not come to pass. In some cases this is because you have not done enough to make them happen. [emphasis is mine, though... anyone who knew him can imagine it as his]
Karen is working hard with other technical librarians in the Library Linked Data group, and I expect that effort to be an important signpost to future actions that may help. Jonathan works in the trenches, actually providing service in one of our more august academic libraries. I bloviate. Add your name to the list. What are you doing, and what should we be doing, collectively, to make our future more effective? Hints: It isn't railing against OCLC to do more (run for User's Council, or whatever they call it now, if you want to move OCLC... or have your library director do some railing). It isn't railing against Google (they have stockholders, and as one, I'm sort of upset that their appearance of high-mindedness cost me a lot of unrealized-gain this quarter).
I'm not sure what the answer is. But it isn't writing blog posts like this, either. Visionary with action plan wanted.
-----
Another exquisite screen in the Nezu Museum in Tokyo.
