Differences between "has role" and "plays role"?

[linikujp]

Isn't someone or some entity who has a role plays the role?

[ElisaKendall]

@linikujp Hi Asiyah, actually the way the model is designed, a situation, state of affairs, or some sort of composition has a role associated with it, and some independent thing (independent continuant, information content entity, or something or similar) plays the role. This is a different pattern from BFO, where only independent continuants can play roles -- we use this pattern to represent ingredients in a formulation or recipe in addition to organizations playing the role of a manufacturer, for example.

There is a confluence page that describes some of this, at https://wiki.edmcouncil.org/display/IDMP/Pattern%3A+Contextualized+Roles+-+APPROVED, and we have more pages where the intent is to clarify further once we get a few more issues completed for the 0.5.0 release.

[linikujp]

The resource you pointed to does not contain the modeling of "has role" besides "plays role".
My question is more along the line that if "plays role" is similar with "has role", these two could possibly merge as one.
From your answer, do you mean the "has role" in the ontology is the same as the BFO "has role"?