No, not really.
The problem with this is that it is a pyrrhic victory whatever happens.
You do often end up with more restrictive measure relating to the way in which the dog is to be kept if you accept the community resolution than you would get on a contingent destruction order at court. However, at court you do bear the risk of destruction and attacks upon children are emotive. Also, you get a criminal record although it is fair to say that it is not really an offence that says anything about your character.
The reality is that there has been an incident involving a child. I do see your point that the child didn't show the best dog handling which is probably why the parents are not interested.
However, people are very polarised on this issue. You may well meet with somebody who takes the view that children are not careful and that dogs that present a risk cannot be allowed to remain without measures in place.
That said, the parents could refuse to support a prosecution. If you have admitted it anyway though then they could rely on your admissions in interview.
In truth, even at court, you would probably end up with a condition of muzzling in the B & B unless you could show that your dog was restricted to a private area of the B & B.
Can I clarify anything for you?