Text vs Markup Datatype

While I understand motivations for considering the Text datatype [1] to be
a simple string, I find myself wanting the ability to type something as
markup.  That is, I want a rich description of an object as well.

In RDFa, this is rather straightforward:

<div property="description" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral">
<p>Now markup is allow!</p>
<u>l
<li>Red</li>
<li>Green</li>
<li>Blue</li>
</ul>
</div>

gives the output (Turtle):

<> schema:description """<p>Now markup is allow!</p>
<u>l
<li>Red</li>
<li>Green</li>
<li>Blue</li>
</ul>"""^^rdf:XMLLiteral .

There isn't much at [1] that restricts its interpretation but I somehow
doubt this use was the intent.

The question really is: I can do this but what should I expect receiving
systems to do with it?

[1] http://schema.org/Text

-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics