Online rendering of internal cross reference appears broken

[inickles]

In RFD 536 there are a number of internal cross references. The RFD site online currently renders these with the anchor tags, and not the section name that's being referenced as expected. However, the rfd-site running locally for me does work as expected, suggesting that there's a difference between these two environments despite supposedly being on the same git commit of rfd-site.

$ nvm version
v22.12.0
$ git show
commit d79a566433cd43d64335091d7e3d737cb355a409 (HEAD -> main, origin/main, origin/HEAD)
Merge: 06b175e 68f10b9
Author: Benjamin Leonard <benji@oxide.computer>
Date:   Tue Dec 17 12:38:21 2024 +0000

    Merge pull request #95 from oxidecomputer/new-prepare-document

    Migrate to new AsciiDoc renderer
$ git pull
Already up to date.
$ npm i

up to date, audited 1401 packages in 4s

321 packages are looking for funding
  run `npm fund` for details

15 vulnerabilities (11 low, 3 moderate, 1 high)

To address issues that do not require attention, run:
  npm audit fix

To address all issues (including breaking changes), run:
  npm audit fix --force

Run `npm audit` for details.
$ LOCAL_RFD_REPO=~/src/oxide/rfd npm run dev

> dev
> remix vite:dev

  ➜  Local:   http://localhost:3000/
  ➜  Network: use --host to expose
  ➜  press h + enter to show help

[david-crespo]

I think this is a dupe of #25

[hawkw]

I think this is a dupe of #25

I'm not sure if it is, exactly. The issue described in #25 is that we don't honor the :xrefstyle: attribute and instead always default to :xrefstyle: basic --- so, the issue is that an RFD author cannot override the xrefstyle on a per-RFD basis.

The issue here seems to be a fairly recent regression where internal cross-references without explicit xreflabel text don't get rendered using the default xrefstyle, either --- instead, they are rendered as the name of the cross-reference anchor itself (i.e. [_my_section] instead of My Section.

This was not the case until pretty recently: I left #25 (comment) on #25 showing a sample from an RFD where the user-defined xrefstyle was not honored and the cross-references were instead rendered using :xrefstyle: basic. Now, the same cross-references are not processed at all.

In #25 (comment), I included this screenshot, showing the use of the basic xrefstyle when I had set the default to short:

Now, the same excerpt from that RFD looks like this, instead:

So, I think this is a different bug.