Hacker News Reader

Comment by mauvehaus | Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure if this is going to forestall or foment heated discussion about what is or isn't a sandwich, but it's certainly an attempt to codify what constitutes sandwichness:

https://cuberule.com/

View on HN

There’s no such thing as a sandwich (phylogenetically)

There's no such thing as phylogeny (sandwichly)

Sure there is, you just need to look at the evolution of language, not DNA. The common ancestor is a meal eaten by the Earl of Sandwich in the 1760s, “salt beef between two slices of toasted bread”.

We would be remiss not to bring up the sandwich alignment chart:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AlignmentCharts/comments/83l9jy/san...

Yet even their "Anarchist" (lower right) square has a rectangular item of food, with a starchy, finger-friendly exterior around a less starchy & finger-friendly interior.

Vs. a chart with chocolate-covered cherries, ceiling tiles, and such...

Agreed. One point of contention I've seen before is the question of whether a piece of fried chicken with breading is a sandwich. Personally I argue that it is not, because the batter is cooked for the first time on the chicken itself. The starchy finger-friendly exterior should be fully edible before the construction of a sandwich.

You could argue, however, that a piece of fried chicken with breading is technically a meat bun.

I mean, it really depends on the breading, though. Panko, for example, could be already cooked before breading the chicken.

So, I guess a flour breaded fried chicken could be a ravioli whereas a panko breaded fried chicken could be a sandwich.

I will proclaim that the finger-friendly exterior is important, but the order in which the outside vs. contents are added/cooked/finished/whatever is not.

So well-breaded chicken is. Likewise a two-crusted pie. But a ravioli is not a sandwich.

It is brought up on the "Cube Rule" page, but the page contains way more detail than so. If you haven't gone through it before, I recommend you do so.

I subscribe to the fringe "four foods theory":

1) Substance - Indivisible, elemental food. Example: Vanilla ice cream, no toppings

2) Pizza - Monobreadular, arranged. Example: Nigiri sushi

3) Sandwich - Multibreadular, arranged. Example: Big Mac

4) Salad - Separable, not arranged. Example: Salad with croutons

What is lasagna? It doesn't seem to easily fit in any of those categories, although it's clearly not a "substance".

Sandwich, as it is multibreadular and arranged.

Sandwiches are but one part of the equation! For full context see the taxonomic definition of Sandwich (domain Catino, kingdom Cincta).

https://iifrp.org/rfc/RFC-5.html

(disclaimer, I wrote this spec)

I’m a big fan of the cube rule except for its salad category. The idea that a frittata and a bowl of tomato soup are equivalent is hard to swallow (pun intended).

when has any comment posted publicly to the internet forestalled heated discussion?

hot dogs and burritos are sandwiches right?

A burrito is a calzone in the cube rule system, but I'd rather rename that class to burrito.

Agreed. Though oddly that does qualify a corn dog as a burrito on a stick

All according to cube rule:

Hot dogs are categorically tacos.

Burritos typically begin life as a "calzone", but experience most of their brief lives through the lens of a "soup/salad in a bread bowl".

Sometimes people prefer to fold a burrito into the "sushi" pattern. Depends on your mental image of a burrito.

Humanity and its culture can't get stuck because of these outdated and despotic rules. It has been a while since I feel hot dogs started transitioning into quiche.

https://images.huffingtonpost.com/2015-10-20-1445353534-3895...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com