Better standardization of usage options before long-option decisions

After the common options, the next tier are the options that are "near-common", e.g., -Ggrdfile, -Ccpt, and many others. However, in researching what is used and sorting on occurrence I get a typical list like this:

```
2 [-N]
2 [-N]
2 [-N]
```

In all cases these are options that takes the name of a table. I think all of these should become **-N**_table_ and then the usage message can provide any context needed. This would clean up the short usage messages. However, I note this does not translate easily to long-options. There, **--trackfile**=_table_, **--new-data**=_table_, **--nodefile**=_table_ may be more natural since it immediately provides context directly in the synopsis. I think this means the non-common long-format options may in many/most cases be uniquely worded to the module, hence there will be less reuse of keyword/value pairs than I initially imagined.