Any limitation on attributes I can quality with "Role"?

I understand the RoleName attribute of Role superseded NamedPosition, and
the example attributes to qualify with Role on the schema.org/Role page
('member', 'actor') indicate Role being used in the context of the
relationship between a natural person and a thing.

There is a pending extension which adds Role to the subjectOf attribute of
Thing. This would widen the context of Role to the relationship between any
arbitrary thing and any other thing, if I am understanding the proposed
usage correctly. The pending extension subtype linkRole expands the context
to  web links between arbitrary things.

Can I use Role to quality any attribute of any thing I wish, similar to how
I can arbitrarily use a collection of entities anywhere the Schema.org
indicates a single entity is accepted as a value? My particular use case
involves the "telephone" attribute of Person and Organization. I need to
markup multiple telephone numbers for one person, for example, with
identifiers like "default", "mobile", "home", etc.

The telephone entity seems to be a primitive type, expecting a text value;
even though the Schema.org page shows it in the hierarchy like "Thing >
Property > telephone", the https://schema.org/telephone page does not show
it as inheriting attributes from Property. If it did inherit from Property
I'd probably (naively maybe) think "identifier" from Thing might be the
best to use for the type of telephone. But as I understand (maybe my
developer's mindset), primitive types don't inherit from Thing, and the
telephone page seems to indicate that.

So I'm considering qualifying the "text" primitive value of "telephone"
with role to identify "mobile", etc., if I'm free to use Role on any
arbitrary attribute. Is that the case? And can anyone help me with maybe
more of the general principles involved (and intended direction of context
for Role) also?

I've worked as a developer for about 15 years. Writing my first BSD kernel
driver and feeling like I had a grasp of kernel architecture was easier
than gaining some feeling of competency in the semantic web area. I've read
all of the semantic web books I could find and understand OWL, SPARQL, etc.
to some level. I've had difficult finding any good entry-level resources
for on-ramping developers. I hope to write some once I feel like I really
have a grasp of the domain.

Thank you,

Kevin