Which statements about natural language documentation of requirements do not apply?

Natural language documentation of requirements often leads to misunderstandings due to the inherent ambiguity and variability in human language. While it allows for more intuitive expression of ideas, it lacks the precision necessary to eliminate all possible misinterpretations. Therefore, the assertion that natural language requirements cannot be misunderstood is not accurate.

In contrast, the other statements reflect valid considerations in the context of natural language requirements. The use of natural language is indeed mainly focused on capturing behavioral aspects of the system, as it enables stakeholders to express their needs and expectations in a way that is easy to discuss and iterate upon. It may also conform to specific templates to help ensure clarity and consistency, improving the quality of the documentation. Furthermore, natural language often struggles with quality requirements because such requirements typically demand more rigorous and precise formulations, which are better served by formal specifications or structured methodologies.

Thus, the statement that natural language requirements cannot be misunderstood stands out as incorrect, providing an essential understanding of the limitations associated with using natural language for documenting requirements.