I guess for most people the standard is to install things from NPM which explains the format of the documentation. If you want to do something completely raw, you can replace 'lit' with something like this:

https://unpkg.com/lit@3.3.1/index.js?module

You can even dynamically import that in the a running browser console and use it directly on any webpage.

▲ TekMol 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

    I guess for most people the standard is to install things from NPM

"things" that run in the browser?

    replace 'lit' with something like this:
    https://unpkg.com/lit@3.3.1/index.js?module

Thanks, that works:

https://plnkr.co/edit/2y9JEOgSZLpO4bE7

	▲	Ruphin 7 days ago \| parent [-]
		I estimate the vast majority of "web projects" begin with npm installing something of some sort, yes. React is dominating the web development space (judging from the average "popular web stack 2025" search result), and it and a significant portion of the competing platforms start with installing some dependencies with npm (or yarn, or what have you). Especially projects that compete in the same space as Lit. That isn't a criticism of projects that don't use npm, and it doesn't make them less valid, but it makes sense for the documentation to match the average developer's experience.

▲ Ruphin 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Obviously this wouldn't be suitable for (serious) production deployments, but it is a super accessible way to easily get started anywhere.