Common names: submarine, sub.
Another example of something commonly considered a sandwich that is not always a sandwich. Below are the key rules to sandwich definition and how they may or may not be violated.
- Two parallel carbohydrate-based top and bottom layers
- This wholly depends on assembly. For example, Subway Sandwiches have only one slice of bread with a partial cut. They are folded rather than stacked. Furthermore, assuming there are any ingredients at all, the two halves of the bread would not be parallel. Intent is important here: if the bread breaks into two pieces, it is still not considered a sandwich, in much the same was as a Toyota Corolla driving on a beach would not be considered an off-road vehicle. Note: bread is not considered an ingredient in a sandwich.
- Handheld
- Rule not violated
If an open-faced sandwich isn’t a sandwich, what is it?
Not my domain. I’m unqualified to answer. I would suggest checking out homestylemeals.com
How about wraps? They fit your criteria: not only are the top and bottom layers parallel, they are parallel in a cosmic tangential twist!
And before you get all steamy-nostriled and say there is only one carbohydrate layer in a wrap – not two as your definition demands – have you ever seen a wrap where the wrap does not wrap back onto itself at some point? This overlapping plausibly constitutes two layers, and you say nothing about the top and bottom layers needing to be separated by ingredients.
Any way you slice it, a wrap looks like a sandwich.
By that definition Subway serves sandwiches, which is absurd by any definition.
Personally, I find the philodophical nit-picking around here distasteful. Our good website Creator has given us laws to eat by, and all you nasty boys can do is throw semantic mud on Him! Shame on you. I will be eating sandwiches according to His law, and I will enjoy them very much.
You are welcome to consume and define as you believe best, this is simply intended as a guideline according to the opinions of the organization.