This paper asks whether admissibility may proceed as a formal candidate within the TII Framework rather than collapse into consistency, generic closure, or retrospective naming. Its task is not to complete admissibility, derive geometry, or enter physical projection, but to identify its object type, state its minimum formal ingredients, draw prototype separations, and formulate the first rejection clauses under which it would lose the right to proceed. The paper fixes the relevant object as candidate relational configurations considered under the question of whether they may be jointly retained within one record-domain as a non-fragmenting unit. It then argues that admissibility must be stricter than consistency, stronger than generic closure, and non-trivial in exclusion if it is to function as more than a relabeled cautionary term. The result remains deliberately limited. What is secured, if anything, is only this: admissibility may remain speakable as a formal candidate stronger than consistency and precise enough to face later pressure.
Zhaoxun Yun (Thu,) studied this question.