I think that what Ornette meant about Trane is that it was his opinion that Trane got too hung up in the math of it all, at the at least partial expense of what you migh call his "native humanity".
I can see the point, because part of Trane's legacy is that he closed the door when he left the room. Locked it, even. Countless players over the last 40 years have tried to find themselves within Trane's methodologies, to go past him by going through him, and so far ain't nobody made it, or even come close. It could be argued that a "style" that was primarily based on "native humanity" would allow at least a few people to get through it and on into someplace else. But it ain't happened. You can say that that's because it's all being based on imitation, "misunderstanding" or whatever, and you may be right. But still...
OTOH, there's no denying the "native humanity" of the passion with which Trane approached and delivered his work. Even if you choose to view his musical legacy as a series of elaborate, final constructs that are ultimately a dead end for anybody/everybody else, there's no denying the very real human inspiration that the guy provides all who strive to learn and grow. On that level too, he may be "unapproachable", but that's "our" fault, not his.
As to how I feel about it all, hell, it all depends. I never even considered going the Trane route, because I never saw where it would lead me other than to frustration. Not so Lester Young, Sonny Rollins or Albert Ayler. But geez, I love the cat and his music at least as much as anybody else, and I continue to do so to this day.
One thing I decided long ago was that reading Ornette quotes is not a task in which literalism is a virtue. Lots of lines to read between, and plenty of "interpretation" needed. Nothing here to dissuade me of that.