Adaptive reuse of historic buildings is typically evaluated through the preservation of material and authenticity, functional continuity, or the transmission of heritage values -criteria that rarely formulate an independent question: after intervention, can the building still remain an object of new encounters and future interpretation? Continuity of value or meaning does not entail the continued possibility of interpretive encounter; a building may retain its recognized authenticity and values while, through the transformation of its spatial organization, the possibility of discovering and re-reading it is diminished. To address this gap, this paper proposes Interpretive Capacity as a relational, emergent quality arising from the organization of relations among architectural logic, the experience of encounter, and interpretation. Drawing on conservation theory, philosophical hermeneutics, architectural phenomenology, and critical heritage studies, the paper formulates architectural logic not as the building's fixed essence but as a relational pattern of physical and spatial organization that becomes the object of interpretive encounter. The resulting model treats interpretive distance, disclosability, and explorability as the principal mechanisms of encounter; interpretive resistance as the regulating principle governing their relation; sustained openness as a quality emergent from this regulation; and Interpretive Capacity, at a further level, as the capacity for this relational organization to persist across future encounters. This contribution complements, rather than replaces, conventional criteria and remains at the level of theoretical formulation; empirical assessment is left to independent research.