I see 2 issues with your interpretation:
- You interpret the multiplicity in a too direct way. Remember,
UML
is supposed to help to understand, not to obfuscate.
- The are several mistakes in your interpretation. In general, a 2-way relation can be translated to one or two sensible statements:
X [m..n]---[k..l] Y
will be read like this:
X uses/addresses/utilizes/depends/etc. on k..l Y's
Y uses/addresses/utilizes/depends/etc. on m..n X's
I would translate your diagram to the following statements:
- A classification can apply to any number of mountains and each mountain has a qualification
- A mountain can be crossed by an arbitrary amount of routes and route can pass through an arbitrary amount of mountains
- A route can be traveled by multiple parties and each party travels a specific single route
- A party consists of 1 to 6 walkers and a walker can participate in any number of parties
- A party is linked to a guide and a guide can be in charge of several parties
- A qualification can apply to an arbitrary number of guides and each guide has a single qualification