Handle new TSV filename style; other small fixes

[RobH123]

This change is 

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #155 (5268098) into master (05e01f5) will decrease coverage by 10.44%.
The diff coverage is 45.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #155       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   46.71%   36.26%   -10.45%     
===========================================
  Files          26       27        +1     
  Lines        4044     4059       +15     
  Branches     1312     1314        +2     
===========================================
- Hits         1889     1472      -417     
- Misses       1369     1655      +286     
- Partials      786      932      +146     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/core/BCS-usfm-grammar-check.js	54.66% <ø> (ø)
src/core/field-link-check.js	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/core/getApi.js	10.65% <0.00%> (-0.07%)	⬇️
src/core/notes-tsv7-row-check.js	2.70% <0.00%> (-56.58%)	⬇️
src/core/questions-tsv7-row-check.js	2.61% <0.00%> (-63.70%)	⬇️
src/core/text-handling-functions.js	92.59% <ø> (-0.27%)	⬇️
src/core/tn-tsv9-row-check.js	71.49% <ø> (ø)
src/core/tn-tsv9-table-check.js	65.67% <ø> (ø)
src/core/twl-tsv6-row-check.js	2.52% <0.00%> (ø)
src/core/yaml-text-check.js	1.35% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
... and 22 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 05e01f5...5268098. Read the comment docs.

[BincyJ]

@mandolyte, @birchamp would you know what main issue we can connect this PR to?

[BincyJ]

This is a 2.0.0 issue

[BincyJ]

@birchamp can we take the 1.2 tag from this PR?

[RobH123]

@mandolyte Could you please look at this PR before I start on the next round of content publishing. Thanks.

[mandolyte]

Reviewed 2 of 6 files at r1, 35 of 35 files at r2.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @RobH123)

---

src/core/defaults.js, line 7 at r2 (raw file):

  'LT', 'ST',
  'TA', 'TW', 'TWL',
  'TN', 'TN2', 'TQ', 'TQ2',

are still going to need the "...2" repo codes now?

[RobH123]

@mandolyte We still need to distinguish between the old and new TN and TQ formats for validation I think. Maybe for the longer term, TN should be TN1, then TN2 could be just TN, and similarly for TQ? It's going to be tricky, I think, over the next year or so as things change around, and I still expect many changes to this CV package as various tool and content migration decisions are made one by one.