Britain, as a whole, voting for leaving the EU wasn't foreseen at the time of the Scottish independence referendum, so voters in that wouldn't have asked themselves question 1.
So the Scottish government should at this stage try to negotiate a Danish-style deal (Scotland stays in EU and UK). If they are successful, there would be no immediate need for another independence referendum. Otherwise, they should get the best EU membership terms they can for Scotland, and hold another independence referendum.
I also think if we just held the same EU referendum again -- a sort of "are you sure?" -- the response would be a decisive remain vote.
All the vote was about was UK membership of the EU: not austerity, the exchange rate of the pound, the integrity of the UK, or immigration. Anyone who voted thinking otherwise should accept the consequences. Things are going exactly as planned: the UK is now going to leave the EU, and if one or two parts of it secede, those areas which did vote to leave are going to leave the EU.
Given we have already had IndyRef1 and EU1 the defaults are that Scotland is part of the UK and that there will be a Brexit. There is something wrong about repeating referendums until an irreversible result occurs. I believe Indyref2 would be fairer as two questions:
1. "If Brexit, should Scotland be a separate country?" for Scots
2. "Should we still Brexit if there would be a Scexit?" for the whole UK to vote.
If the answers are "yes and no", then we get status quo.