编辑同志:您好！贵刊91年第3期有我的一篇文章——《阅读时间制——未来图书馆的主要借书制度》。我将本文与原稿反复对照了几遍后发现,虽然发表后的文章较原稿少了近千字,但本文的实质性内容不仅一点也未受到损害,而且我还觉得,较原稿的语句更通顺,结构更严谨,逻辑性更强了,尤其是去掉了前后重复的成份。对于您这种认真负责的态度和如此高超的编辑水平,我感到非常的钦佩。 Edit comrades: Hello! There is a piece of my article in the 3rd issue of your magazine in 1991 - “Reading Time System - The Main Library System of the Future Library”. I repeated this article with the manuscript several times and found that although the published article was nearly a thousand words shorter than the manuscript, the substantive content of the article was not only not damaged at all, and I also felt that it was more fluent than the manuscript , The structure is more rigorous, more logical, in particular, removed before and after repeated ingredients. I am greatly admired for your serious and responsible attitude and for the level of editing that I have achieved.