Should XML+RDF be spec compliant. rdfA is not ???
This questioned the default in case of new file in mashlib.
Creating a .rdf resource succeed but display a parse error.

Should XML+RDF be spec compliant. rdfA is not ??? This questioned the default in case of new file in mashlib. Creating a .rdf resource succeed but display a parse error.

Are you talking specifically about the content type of the file being PATCHed? I sincerely hope that in the future RDFa will be patchable but that's a big task and not in the spec (yet) so no, I don't think we can offer to support it now. The simple case of creating a new RDFa file with PATCH could easily work but it does not make sense to me to support it if none of the other operations can work. As for XML+RDF - I am not familiar enough with parsing it to know for sure, but it seems to me that there would be no special issues for PATCH and therefore should be supported.

^^ By which I mean that we should support sending a text/n3 PATCh to change an xml+rdf document, not that we should support sending an xml+rdf PATCH.

I feel out of my depth to review this.