Nested Jeet grids: span() with inherited context or column() with explicit counts?

Inherited context versus explicit column counts

The goal is a nested fluid layout in Jeet 7.x for Sass: a child grid sitting inside a parent span, staying free of visible gaps or overlaps from narrow mobile widths up to large desktops. The toolchain assumes Dart Sass 1.23+ so the calc()-based gutter math compiles.

Jeet documents two sizing paths for that nesting. span(fraction, context, offset) inherits the parent's column context, ultimately falling back to $jeet-grid-columns (12 by default), while column(ratio, columns, gutter) fixes the count per call. The constraint: Jeet emits percentage widths and calc() gutters with no rounding strategy, and browsers round fractional percentages differently (floor, round, or truncate), so nested spans with differing contexts can compound sub-pixel drift.

What stays unresolved is which path keeps that drift bounded. Inheriting context preserves one continuous ratio chain; explicit counts make each level's math self-contained. It is unclear whether either prevents rounding artifacts at certain viewport widths, or whether the only lever is keeping nesting shallow and aligning child counts with the parent.

• For nested grids with non-12 column counts, is span() with inherited context or column() with explicit counts the more predictable choice?
• Does Jeet expose any rounding control, or is aligning child column counts with the parent context the practical mitigation?