In addition to François's answer, I'll address the second question.
Are there any differences between the case over $\mathbb Q$ and a number fields $L$?
The main difference - which can be dealt with but should not be forgotten nevertheless - is that there are now many embeddings of the field of definitions into $\mathbb C$, and that some but not necessarily all of them might be real embeddings.
Since Beilinson's conjecture makes crucial use of the Hodge structure on the singular cohomology $H^i((X\times_{L,\sigma}\mathbb C)(\mathbb C),\mathbb Q)$ of the variety $X$ (with $\sigma:L\hookrightarrow\mathbb C$ an embedding) and more precisely of the Hodge structure on $H^i((X\times_{L,\sigma}\mathbb C)(\mathbb C),\mathbb Q)\otimes_{\mathbb Q}\mathbb C$ (which is always an $\mathbb R$-Hodge structure, but not always an $\mathbb R$-Hodge structure over $\mathbb R$) one must be careful when generalizing from $\mathbb Q$ to $L$: should one fix an embedding? consider them all at once? does the conjecture depend on this choice? what if some embeddings are real and some complex? etc.
Incidentally, the same difficulty arises for the Bloch-Kato conjectures predicting the exact value of special values of $L$-function with respect to the $p$-adic étale realization (in that case, there might be many primes above $p$ in $L$ and the $D_{\operatorname{dR}}$-module appearing in the conjecture might depend on the choice of the prime).