Messages

From google 'For your origin country make sure you type a 2 digit abbreviation only. '

I don't understand. I checked the abbreviations for the United States and this is what I have:
ISO(2): US
ISO(3): USA

I'm still having getting the same error.

Did you register for a web API  at this url?
https://secure.shippingapis.com/registration/

Yes, I did register; I used the new username and password; they did not work. I keep getting same error message. The US Postal Service included a couple of URLs for their production servers. Do I need to enter the URLs too? If so, where?

I'm getting the following US Postal Service error message:

"API Authorization failure. RateV4 is not a valid API name for this protocol."

How do I get this issue resolved?

I'm hiring someone to customize Abantecart for me. They are asking what PHP framework it uses. Any idea?

Does Abantecart support extensions using vqmod? If not, is there a workaround?

I hesitate to continue this "heated" exchange as Ollie continues to ignore my point that it is not a mandatory rule under existing Sec 508.  Each business owner should assess their own needs in this matter.

Ollie,  it strikes me as odd that you complained about your existing cart being deficient in this accessibility standard, and since it is a key component of your business it would seem that would have been one of the first things you tested for when you started to evaluate Abantecart for your purposes.  The National Federation for the Blind has several companies who will gladly (for a fee) enable your site to meet your requirements. 

There are lots of ways for each of us to address our specific needs for our businesses.  And we all make concession to what we want and what we are willing to pay for.   

There are people who figure out to do things and people who believe they are entitled for others to do things for them.  Makes an interesting world.

If I continue to ignore your reference that there is no "mandatory rule under existing Sec 508", you continue to ignore my point about the legal battles concerning web accessibility. By the way, I did not ignore your comment. Did you read what I said earlier? And here I quote myself: "The fact that the DOJ proposed new legislation doesn't mean that businesses cannot be held accountable under existing legislation (namely ADA) to provide accessible websites!" In other words, even though ADA does not even mention web accessibility (since it was enacted in the 90s when the web was still in its infancy), websites are expected to comply based on previous court cases. The courts recognize that the same principles applying to accessibility in general also apply to the Internet. Simply put, web accessibility is not something that only affects MY business. It affects EVERY SINGLE business that has a website. I don't believe you speak for the National Federation of the Blind. But thank you for the useless suggestion. NFB is not in the business of making web design referrals; they provide services for the blind, act on their behalf, and certify websites for web accessibility and that's about it: https://nfb.org/technology-center What makes you think that an association for the blind can help solve a problem with Abantecart? No, the best place is to start with people who are more familiar with this shopping cart, and I believe that's the reason why we are all here. Remember you are the one who suggested that I post my question in this forum and yet you came back to continue the "heated" debate??? An administrator posted earlier that he considers including accessibility in a future release, and that's good news! This is what I call being proactive versus reactive. Frankly, I don't understand why you are getting so argumentative when the administrator already see the validity of my suggestion! How much I'm willing to pay for a solution is entirely up to me. Let's leave it at that for the sake of avoiding further controversy. I may simply decide that there must be other posters in this forum that are more willing to contribute than antagonize, and provide me with the simple answer that I'm looking for. Don't worry. I don't need your free assistance. LOL. And if I don't need your free assistance, there's nothing for you to worry about. In fact, there's nothing else to argue about. Thank you for the inspirational video, but I already have my sources of inspiration in life. There's no point in arguing with someone who flatly REFUSES to SEE my point of view! Speaking of Helen Keller, she has a beautiful essay that talks about what she would be able to do if only she had three days to see. It's worthwhile reading because, even though she was blind, deaf, and mute, she was able to SEE, HEAR, and SPEAK better than some of us "normal" human beings. The essay is on my website at http://www.assistech.com/three-days-to-see.htm It's also very inspirational!

However the last statement of By Law is inaccurate information.  It only applies to Title I (has to do with employment) and Title II  (State or local government).  Title III – which has to do with commerce is concerned mainly with physical access – here's the current ADA rules for title III -

Obviously, this is a matter of semantic interpretation. I already pointed out in my personal communication with Ilegrand that the US courts have increasingly been recognizing the rights of blind people to web accessibility under the ADA. There have been several lawsuits by the National Federation of the Blind, all of which have been ruled in their favor. It began with Target Corporation in 2006. Unfortunately, Ilegrand seems to be ignoring what I was trying to tell him. I will not get into an endless, annoying debate (I had enough of that), but I do want to rebut with some additional comments. As far as I'm concerned, the Internet has no borders and when I say "required by law", I'm not referring to the USA only. I do have customers in many other countries. This Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_accessibility#Legally_required_web_accessibility points to a new global trend showing that several countries are already working to make web accessibility mandatory. It's just a matter of time. And frankly it doesn't matter if web accessibility is "required by law" or not. The fact is that blind people along with other disabled groups are entitled to the same basic rights. I think nobody would dispute that. I hope!!

References:
NFB Target Lawsuit: http://www.nfbtargetlawsuit.com/
National Federation of the Blind and Two Blind Taxpayers File Suit Against H&R Block: https://nfb.org/national-federation-blind-and-two-blind-taxpayers-file-suit-against-hr-block
NFB Announces Lawsuit Against Philadelphia Library for Using Inaccessible E-Readers: http://disabilitylaw.blogspot.com/2012/05/nfb-announces-lawsuit-against.html

These are just some of the cases. In other words, by not complying with web accessibility requirements, any business could be potential target of these lawsuits! It's as simple as that. As far as I know, NFB have been working actively to make sure web accessibility becomes a reality for the blind. Likewise, the US government is pushing the private sector to comply with ADA. I've had several customers buying ADA kits for their hotels to avoid being fined in case they get audited by the Department of Justice.

In this video, attorney David Allen discusses a case where a legally blind woman sues a fast food restaurant under the Americans with Disabilities Act for not providing menus for the blind.

The fact that the DOJ proposed new legislation doesn't mean that businesses cannot be held accountable under existing legislation (namely ADA) to provide accessible websites! The courts have the final say in matters of litigation. I'm always skeptical of people who knit-pick on trivial details instead of finding solutions. (For example, my question of where to find the files I need remains unanswered.)

Even the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative has addressed the issue:
A Cautionary Tale of Inaccessibility:  Target Corporation: http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/target-case-study

Finally, here's some food for thought:
Is Web Accessibility a Human Right? http://rebuildingtheweb.com/en/is-web-accessibility-a-human-right/

The solution I found was to shorten the text for the subcategories I was having trouble with. By doing so I was able to change from 2-line to 1-line display and this seems to have solved the problem!

One thing I noticed about Abantecart is its lack of accessibility for the blind. The checkout pages, for example, are not accessible. The "remove" button cannot be accessed by a blind user who relies on a screen reader. Likewise, the "returning customer" portion of the page is not accessible either. See http://assistech.com/store/index.php?rt=account/login In order to be accessible and compliant with W3C guidelines, Abantecart needs to allow blind users to navigate through by using their computer keyboards instead of mouse clicking. Currently, this is not possible. Each <label class="control-label"> needs to be expanded to include a "for" attribute. For example, for the "login name", it has to say <label class=control-label" for="loginFrm_loginname">. This is true of all form fields, they each must anchor text with form input. This is the only way a blind user can use an online form successfully. Otherwise, the web page is useless for them. With that said, I need to incorporate theses changes to my shopping cart, but I don't know which page controls the checkout form. Any help is great appreciated. Along the lines of accessibility, it's important to note that the same principles that apply to ADA also apply to web accessibility. More and more courts in the US are recognizing the rights of people with disabilities to equal access. By law, businesses should make their web content accessible for all.

try to set subcategory name font from 16 to 14px in your style.css line 79

I don't see any subcategory name in style.css

Thank you, Lee. Your screenshot stops at the Shipping Estimator. As I said earlier, I'm not having a problem with shipping estimator. The problem is when I proceed to Guest Checkout (all the way to the end). Select "payment by check" and go all the way to the very end. You'll see that it's charging sales tax on non-taxable states. At least, that's what I'm showing on my end. I used two different browsers (Explorer and Firefox).

Oliver

1. Clear AbanteCart cache in admin (Admin-System-Cache)
2. Try to check guest checkout again in another browser
3. Post here your AbanteCart version
4. Post here your site url

I cleared the cache following your instructions and tried to guest checkout on Firefox. The tax problem persists. I'm using version 1.1.9. The website URL is www.assistech.com/store

Thank you.

Make sure you have disabled non needed tax rates and/or tax classes.
Please see screenshot with guest checkout on my side AbanteCart 1.1.9 It work fine according tax rates configured

As far as I can tell, I only have one tax class. Within this class I have two tax rates, one for California and one for Arizona. It makes no sense that when checking out as a guest, I'm being charged sales tax for Minnesota, for example, but when logged in, I'm not. Thank your for taking the time to provide the screenshots; however, your suggestion does not address the issue that I have pointed out. Please note: I'm not having trouble with AZ/CA taxations, they are working fine. The problem is with the non-taxable states that are being taxed when they shouldn't. Again, this only happens when I'm checking out as a guest. The shipping estimator works just fine for all states.

For some reason, some subcategories in my shopping cart are not displaying properly. Blanks are shows instead of the images. See examples of good and bad.

GOOD:
http://assistech.com/store/index.php?rt=product/category&path=43
http://assistech.com/store/index.php?rt=product/category&path=58

BAD:
http://assistech.com/store/index.php?rt=product/category&path=36
http://assistech.com/store/index.php?rt=product/category&path=52

Questions: Why is this happening? And how to fix it?

Thank you for your help.

Please login to your test customer's account and try to checkout with address from rates.

When I logged in and placed a test order, the tax rates were charged correctly (for both taxable and non-taxable states). When I checked out as a Guest, it charged sales tax on all the states I tested, including the non-taxable states.