Your interpretation does not at all fit with how it has historically been understood. First of all, the canon does apply to the laity. Secondly, in the context of the Fathers of the Council of Nicea, kneeling was not understood as an act of adoration, but one of penitence.
However, there is a sense in which your understanding is correct. The canon was not a condemnation of laity (or clergy) kneeling in adoration (in their historical and cultural context, one would not have knelt in adoration, but as a sign of penitence or sorrow). It is because of the concern of this disciplinary canon that penitence and/or sorrow is inconsistent with the celebration of the Resurrection that kneeling was forbidden on Sundays. Therefore, as kneeling would later come to be associated with adoration in the West, this canon (which, as I noted above, is disciplinary, and not dogmatic), need not be understood as condemning later Western practices of kneeling in adoration.
I would also add that I, as an Eastern Catholic, do not kneel at celebrations of the Divine Liturgy, as I believe it to be inappropriate to our traditions. On the other hand, I see no problem with kneeling at the Roman Mass, and, in fact, when I attend Mass, I kneel at the appropriate times.
