Add Tailwind support for Figma variables

[davestewart]

Note

Check the comment thread, as the final PR also introduced new settings to determine when variables were used, as well as #110 which improved how colors are derived

This PR modifies the Tailwind color functions to support Figma variables.

This allows users to use custom variables in their design systems, such as neutral/700 or buttons/active-border which then output as classes such as bg-neutral-700 or border-buttons-active-border:

The main update to the code is that rather than passing in a color and opacity, you pass the entire fill or color stop and the function's code returns the color name as-is if it's a variable, or looks up the nearest value if not.

Output looks like this:

<div class="w-44 h-36 relative">
  <div class="w-20 h-36 left-0 top-0 absolute">
    <div class="left-[16px] top-0 absolute text-neutral-900 text-xs font-normal font-['Inter']">Variables</div>
    <div class="w-20 h-28 left-0 top-[27px] absolute">
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-0 top-0 absolute bg-test-dragon"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-[44px] top-0 absolute bg-test-dragon-light/opacity-25"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-0 top-[44px] absolute bg-gradient-to-b from-test-dragon to-test-sky"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-[44px] top-[44px] absolute bg-gradient-to-b from-test-dragon to-test-sky"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-[44px] top-[88px] absolute bg-gradient-to-b from-test-dragon via-green-300 to-test-sky"></div>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="w-20 h-24 left-[103px] top-0 absolute">
    <div class="left-[16px] top-0 absolute text-neutral-800 text-xs font-normal font-['Inter']">Colors</div>
    <div class="w-20 h-20 left-0 top-[27px] absolute">
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-0 top-0 absolute bg-lime-400"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-[44px] top-0 absolute bg-lime-400/opacity-25"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-0 top-[44px] absolute bg-gradient-to-b from-lime-400 to-cyan-400"></div>
      <div class="w-8 h-8 left-[44px] top-[44px] absolute bg-gradient-to-b from-lime-400 to-cyan-400"></div>
    </div>
  </div>
</div>

Closes #107

Relates to #102

[bernaferrari]

will this work: bg-lime-400/opacity-25? Shouldn't it be /25? Or you created a variable that's actually 25? My biggest fear is that if someone has figma variables but don't use custom tailwind file won't be able to get benefits, but maybe I'm wrong. What do you think?

[davestewart]

Hey! Thanks for jumping on to this.

Looking at the docs, it appears I made a mistake with the opacity code! It was this line I refactored; did I misunderstand?

Fixed now:

Regarding a user using variables but not a custom tailwind file, you make a fair point.

Saying that, our designer was actually quite surprised about the color being rounded in the first place.

But of course, you need to make sure things don't break going forward.

Perhaps a "Conversion" dropdown would be useful here:

Label	Behaviour	Output	Comment
Exact	Passes arbitrary hex value to Tailwind to generate new rule	bg-[#bef260]	Solves #102
Closest	Rounds to closest Tailwind default color	bg-lime-300	Current behaviour
Custom	Uses variables to indicate custom token name	bg-success	Solves #107

Saying that, maybe that doesn't work, as we would only need to decide what happens with variable, rounding happens anyway, so perhaps it's a kind of blended mix of the three?

Also, I don't know enough about the UI element of figma panels to know where this would go. I see there is the debug UI; I assume that is where it happens?

FWIW, this was our designer's reaction to seeing custom tokens:

[bernaferrari]

I wish the user had only to choose between two options, but in that case seems fair. I don't know if I have a 3 option switch. Will probably be similar to swiftui scaffold x etc thing. I'll take a look

[davestewart]

I wonder if two checkboxes could do it?

• Round color values to closest
• Use variables as color names

Results would be:

Round colors	Var names	Description
.	.	Arbitrary colors for everything
x	.	Rounded colors for everything
.	x	Arbitrary colors for fills and custom tokens for variables
x	x	Rounded colors for fills and custom tokens for variables

Vs Dropdown:

Option	Description
Exact	Arbitrary colors for everything
Rounded	Rounded colors for everything
Custom	Rounded colors for fills and custom tokens for variables

Just trying to think through the problem...

[bernaferrari]

Yeah, could make sense... Most people would use the round color but not use variable. I think I like this.

[davestewart]

OK, updates made.

Preferences

I added two new preferences, and disambiguated the one for values / sizes:

  roundTailwindValues: boolean;
  roundTailwindColors: boolean,
  customTailwindColors: boolean,

I also made the labels less ambiguous (and perhaps in a future update we could update the UI to UI3?)

Colors

A couple of points to take into account:

1. I've aligned with the way value-rounding works for colors, so both values and colors automatically show Tailwind tokens (lime-300) rather than arbitrary values (bg-[#bef264]) if they match Tailwind config.

2. It's a bit tricky to get the color color names right just now, as they are within common/retrieveUi/retrieveColors. However, Simplify Tailwind implementation #110 has already done the work to simplify this, so if you're happy to wait I can look to marry the preferences and color output values in that PR.

If we can get this merged sooner rather than later, I'll merge these changes into #110 and #113 then things will be looking pretty rosy!

[bernaferrari]

I'm happy. I think just the label could be shorter. Maybe use a popover to explain more, maybe I don't know. What do you think? Do you like this? I think it is just consuming too much space.

[davestewart]

I wondered the same.

Your custom UI is quite bulky compared to the built-in one:

But then even that looks like a lot of text.

Here's the checkboxes in case you want to play around:

[ ] React (JSX)
[ ] Optimize layout
[ ] Include layer names in classes
[ ] Round pixel values to Tailwind defaults
[ ] Round color values to Tailwind defaults
[ ] Use variables as custom color tokens

Or, shorter (this is probably the quickest win):

[ ] React (JSX)
[ ] Optimize layout
[ ] Include layer names
[ ] Round pixel values
[ ] Round color values
[ ] Custom color variables

I wonder if groups might help? Though I know it's only Tailwind which has the majority of the options right now.

Layout:

[ ] React (JSX)
[ ] Optimize layout
[ ] Include layer names in classes

Values:

[ ] Round pixel values to Tailwind defaults
[ ] Round color values to Tailwind defaults
[ ] Use variables as custom color tokens

Or, shorter:

Layout:

[ ] React (JSX)
[ ] Optimize layout
[ ] Include layer names

Tailwind:

[ ] Round pixel values
[ ] Round color values
[ ] Custom color variables

??

[bernaferrari]

Could be something like "optimize" and opens a pop-up where you can select what you want to optimize, I don't know..
Or "round values...", you click, and can choose which value you want. A dropdown could work.

[davestewart]

Could be something like "optimize" and opens a pop-up where you can select what you want to optimize

I kind of see what you mean, but as they are preferences, aren't they all "optimizations"? And maybe users might want to change per-component, so might be good to make it really accessible.

Just seeing if there are any examples of Figma already doing this:

Maybe:

Layout

[ ] React (JSX)
    Use className instead of class
[ ] Optimize layout
    I still don't know what this is
[ ] Include layer names
    Include layer names in list of Tailwind classes
    
Tailwind

[ ] Round pixel values
    Round pixel values to configured Tailwind pixel values
[ ] Round color values
    Round color values to configured Tailwind color values
[ ] Custom color variables
    Use Figma variable names in place of Tailwind color names

Looks bulky as hell there, but would be smaller font size and dropped-back color.

I think maybe at this stage just have the extra checkboxes and make improving the Plugin UI a separate ticket.

Could combine aligning it with the Figma UI3.

[bernaferrari]

what if we did something like an accordion/collapsible https://ui.shadcn.com/docs/components/collapsible where you have the "advanced features" there? Not sure we have enough, but could work...

Optimize layout works like this:
you have a frame with two rectangles inside, everything using absolute position. If you press shift+a, figma is going to make an auto layout for you automatically. Inferred try to guess that and if it is possible to make an autolayout automatically, it will do.

[davestewart]

By "advanced features"  you mean the rounding / variables options?

Also, would need to work out how the UI would look with an accordian.

How would that look? I think the checkboxes would need to be block not inline if that was the case.

[bernaferrari]

Yes. You would have a block section, that expands with inline things. But that's just an idea. I'm open for other ideas too. As long as the UI is easy, feel free to think on anything

[davestewart]

OK, I took a quick stab at shorter labels and title props:

Second option was longer labels but simpler checkboxes:

Third option, simpler checkboxes and smaller labels with longer descriptions:

My feelings about a dropdown are:

• I'm not sure it's possible to make the choice for the user to determine what is "advanced"
• Delivering a significantly new UI setup feels like an new ticket
• Users probably won't be tinkering with this UI that often anyway

Of the above screenshots:

• I prefer the 3rd
• Could do more work later

Also, probably lose all the backgrounds and borders (they just make it look busy for no reason):

Anyway. Heading to bed now. Would love to move ahead on this tomorrow!

[bernaferrari]

I think I like the most the first. Which one did you like the most?

[davestewart]

I prefer the last one with the simpler UI that paves the way for something UI3-compatible.

But I've updated the code with the shorter labels and tooltips, so that's effectively ready to go now.

[bernaferrari]

I like the last one, but I think there are too many options before the user sees the code which is the main part. Thanks. Should I merge already?

[davestewart]

before the user sees the code which is the main part

Yeah, I suppose the last 3 options are probably the ones which the user would be most interested in.

I think better groups as outlined earlier would be the best solution to this, but think that should be a separate ticket, and as mentioned taking a look at implementing a UI3 theme.

So for now, I think yeah, get this merged 🫡

[bernaferrari]

Ok, perfect. Thanks!

[davestewart]

OK. On to the next PR!