chore(tailwind): use @theme inline and add docs

[Barsnes]

Summary

resolves #4317

This was first generated by Claude, then modified and check by me.

Checks

• I have read the contribution guidelines
• I have added a changeset (run pnpm changeset if relevant)

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: bd1305c

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 5 packages

Name	Type
@digdir/designsystemet	Patch
@digdir/designsystemet-css	Patch
@digdir/designsystemet-react	Patch
@digdir/designsystemet-types	Patch
@digdir/designsystemet-web	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

Preview deployments for this pull request:

storybook - 20. Sep 2026 - 13:45

www - 20. Sep 2026 - 13:47

[eirikbacker]

Fantastic PR! 🤗 Only one though; Tailwind v3 supports @theme but not @theme inline - should we have a config --tailwind=v3 or similar as well for backwards compatible export? 🤔

[Barsnes]

Fantastic PR! 🤗 Only one though; Tailwind v3 supports @theme but not @theme inline - should we have a config --tailwind=v3 or similar as well for backwards compatible export? 🤔

@mimarz needs to decide this

[mimarz]

Fantastic PR! 🤗 Only one though; Tailwind v3 supports @theme but not @theme inline - should we have a config --tailwind=v3 or similar as well for backwards compatible export? 🤔

@mimarz needs to decide this

I agreed with the config option, but lets look at it next week how we expose/enable this :)

[mimarz]

I will make a new PR where we enable the new output config field. When doing so I can pull tailwind out of experimental there, since building the current way (using tokens build) will be deprecated.

[Barsnes]

I will make a new PR where we enable the new output config field. When doing so I can pull tailwind out of experimental there, since building the current way (using tokens build) will be deprecated.

Would it not be easier to just rework this branch since this also includes docs?

[mimarz]

I continued working on this in PR #5438 with backwards support for v3.