There is no need for an arbitrary "markup" that you then restrict based on your use-case (in your case it's some sort international-aware storage of different data).
Databases are designed to store data, and storing markup like your example above is basically a misuse on some level. Your example above has a clear structure, and that structure can be encoded as raw data in database tables. So instead of having a generic set of tables (as per your other comment) to "store markup" data, you would rather come up with tables that represent your actual requirement and what that markup is meant to indicate.
Some database also have inheritance models which allow you to store the data above quite trivially. You basically have a "base" and then extend it with specific fields for each type (en, ru, es, etc).
So please, don't put markup in your database like that. It's a big no-no, and I'm sure your DBAs would tell you that very quickly. Else, just throw that crap into a document-store and make it someone else's problem as is unfortunately all too-common lately.
Databases are designed to store data, and storing markup like your example above is basically a misuse on some level. Your example above has a clear structure, and that structure can be encoded as raw data in database tables. So instead of having a generic set of tables (as per your other comment) to "store markup" data, you would rather come up with tables that represent your actual requirement and what that markup is meant to indicate.
Some database also have inheritance models which allow you to store the data above quite trivially. You basically have a "base" and then extend it with specific fields for each type (en, ru, es, etc).
So please, don't put markup in your database like that. It's a big no-no, and I'm sure your DBAs would tell you that very quickly. Else, just throw that crap into a document-store and make it someone else's problem as is unfortunately all too-common lately.