It may indeed be a statement that they are not to be regarded as heretics; but communion has not been restored, Rome is not commemorated in the dyptics of the Great Church of Christ. From a technical perspective it could be said that they went from being classified as mere heretics to schismatics. Regardless of the pragmatic implications, canonically speaking this is a step backwards for our relations with Rome as schism is worse than heresy.
What kind of schism though. I recently read an essay written within our church concerning the schism between the MP and ROCOR which speaks of two types of schism, one of which - if it is merely administrative - then neither side is graceless or outside the Church. Check this out:
(snip) St Basil the Great has to say.
Heresies is the name applied to those who have broken entirely and have
become alienated from the faith itself. Schisms is the name applied to those
who on account of ecclesiastical causes and remediable questions have
developed a quarrel amongst themselves . [Concerning heresies] the question
is one involving a difference of faith in God itself. It therefore seemed
best to those who dealt with the subject in the beginning to rule that the
attitude of heretics should be set aside entirely; but as for those who have
merely split apart as a schism, they were to be considered as still
belonging to the Church. "From The Canonical Epistles, Or, More Expressly, The Ninety-Two Canons, Of Our Father Among The Saints, Basil The Great Interpreted, The Rudder, (1957), p 773
" . . . Schism comes in two versions, as explained previously; it can be due to heresy (the worst kind, that results in departure of the Holy Spirit), or it can be due to disputes of an administrative nature (where
both groups remain within the Church). . . .Because the separation (between ROCOR and the MP)
is not on heretical grounds, then, as explained by St Basil the Great, MP remains within the Church."
It seems to me - from the language in the joint statements by Rome and the EP - that the EP does not believe
the schism to be based on heresy because they have said the Orthodox condemnation of Latin heresies is "without foundation" and must be "obliterated from memory".
Then again, I might have it all wrong