The following are the identifiable functional requirements for the online dating system:
1. Login credentials: Store all the names of persons with their detail in a database so that it can be searchable. It can be exercised through registering at the website.
a. The logged in person at any moment would make sure that all the various other logged persons are viewable and can be contacted via the forum used in the website. The functionalities of blogging of Web 2.0 technologies can be fully exploited for fetching all the desired mechanism for posting messages to each other.
2. Communication pattern: The interviewing method is used for making good of the communication pattern of the people in the website. The private messages targeted at a particular user are quite different from the forum where several members can post to each other. A system called “Express Crush” can be used for posting private messages to a member and “Dish Out” is used to discuss ones dating experiences. Such requirements can be done using RSS of Web 2.0 for automatic notification of responses from members (Abram).
3. Storage and retrieval of profiles: The posting of profiles is very important for every member as that forms a large amount of decision factor for every member to select the other sex for dating. XML technologies can be very easily incorporated for database related purposes.
a. Modification and deletion of profiles are also to be exercised by the member.
b. The automatic updation of the updated profiles and user preferences must be reflected on the online dating website using Ajax technologies of Web 2.0
4. Storing and uploading audios/videos for experiences: The experiences can be taped and uploaded for other users to view to make the site more dynamic and rocking. Videos can be downloaded and using the podcasting of Web 2.0 technology can be used for streaming such videos in iPods and similar products. Audio blogging is quite popular and can be integrated with the website (Johnson).
5. Member ratings: The members can be rated for their participation and their contributions in the online dating website. Such ratings are viewable and can serve a great purpose to enrich ones participation to achieve that level. The features like “Trendy Member”, “What a Loser!” and others can be taken into account for better experiences.
6. Place of interest: The romantic places can be explored in the website along with various promotional offers for daters in physical meet up. Such features can be implemented in accordance to the various user locations and some dream holidaying packages can be offered to the highest rated members. Such features can be implemented using the technological platforms like Google Maps which would map with user’s city of choice and preference for holidaying and similarly display tourist locations at that place through the website.
7. An online encyclopedia can be prepared using Wikis of Web 2.0 technologies for dynamic representation of information and for adding more knowledge for “Better dating practices”, “10 Tips for converting your dates into affair”, “Dating no-no”, “First Impression”, “Catching details”, “Getting humorous” and similar features. This storehouse of information can comprise the wiki of the website and enable people to add their wits for development of the website with rich content. It would also enable the following:
· Educating young people deeply about privacy, trust and the social web. For all participation, the profiles of all people are viewed by millions of people which often pose a threat.
· Libraries would be integrated digitally with online databases and video podcasting facility would be made available for ‘Anytime Anywhere Access’ (Chawner).
· It must be done to foster better thoughts in the minds of people and share information.
8. Tagging, an Web 2.0 technology can be used extensively for finding a person with the tags which define one, such as “Non-Smoker”, “Leader”, “Diplomatic”, “Business Tycoon” and others. It enables the online dating site to be fully classified and searchable and a member can find information quite easily. It would generate the automation of “Data Mashups”, a Web 2.0 terminology for better aggregation of services pulled from several services (Anderson).
9. Administration for abuses: All abuses or unconventional situations are dealt in severely by the website administration support system and are deleted from the website giving a notification of warning to the responsible member.
1. Performance Requirements:
a. Should run on 500 MHz, 64 MB machine.
b. 90% of the responses should be within 2-3 seconds depending on the network bandwidth, except for downloading audios and videos which would take a considerable amount of time depending on the bandwidth and size of the file.
2. Design Constraints:
a. Security: The security of member portfolios are protected by privacy rules and is not traded for any reasons. The daters list and their experiences are optional to be stored either in private area or public baskets and such information bases are not shared personally with any external agent.
b. Fault Tolerance: Data is stored in fully stable databases and forms a part of the website. Database features like replication and fragmentation is exercised fully for safety of data in any exceptional cases.
3. External Interface Requirements:
The interface would be in accordance to the usability criteria and system evaluation would be performed thoroughly using heuristics and cognitive walkthrough’s for better user experience and acceptance.
4. Legal and political implications:
As such the system would not face any legal and political circumstances. In case of identity theft and violation of rules, the jurisdiction of the state laws are applicable to be enforced and the member would be suspended until the case is resolved. All actions and membership is voluntary and no member is bound for any compliances.
Abram, S. Web 2.0—huh? Library 2.0, librarian 2.0.Information Outlook 2005, 9, 44–5.
Anderson, Paul. JISC: What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implication for education, 2007.
BERNERS-LEE, T. Weaving the Web. Orion Business Books. HarperCollins, New York, 2007.
Chawner, B. and Lewis, P. H. “WikiWikiWebs: new ways of interacting in a web environment”, hand –out prepared for LITA National Forum, October 2004, 8-10,Sheraton West Port Lakeside Chalet, St Louis, MO.
CYCH, L. Social Networks. In: Emerging Technologies for Education, BECTA (Ed.). Becta ICT Research: Coventry, UK, 2006.
Dyrud, M., Worley, R… “Blogs”, Business Communication Quarterly 2005, 68 (10), pp.66-7.
Jones, B Godwin. Blogs and wikis: Environments for on-line collaboration. Language, Learning and Technology, 7(2), 12-16, 2003.
Johnson, T., Kaye, B. “Wag the blog: how reliance on traditional media and the internet influence credibility perceptions of weblogs among web users”, J&MC Quarterly 2004, 81 (3), pp.622-42.
Nardi, B., Schiano, D., Gumbrecht, M., Swartz, L… “Why we blog”, Communications of the ACM 2004, Vol. 47 No.12, pp.41-6.