It looks like a rose, but it has only the one layer of petals and there are no thorny vines? And, the leaves don't have the jagged edges I associate with roses. But, you are definitely right. Here is a picture from the web of a Texas Wild Rose
Rosa corymbifera Rosa pimpinellifolia Heckenrose Bilder Rosa arvensis Rosaceae Rosa canina How does one distinguish between these?
These are not all distinctly different, but a matter of language. Rosaceae is the family, Rosa is the genus, and canina is the species. This being a university's botanic garden's forum, we would generally use those terms. While I don't like the common names, some people would call this flower a dog rose. Hence, Rosa canina. The lack of serration on the leaves and lack of thorns is interesting, but roses have been bred and cross bred for centuries and it's just possible that's what you are seeing. To tell for certain what species a plant is takes a bit of observation and technical knowledge.
A brief wiki check tells me Rosa pimpinellifolia is a European species. Rosa corymbifera appears to be an obsolete synonym for Rosa canina. Rosa arvensis is British, and very similar to Rosa canina. Heckenrose Bilder appears to be a German name for their wild rose database, maybe? Anyhow, also a non-starter. None of this is difficult to find, anymore than your image research. They are pretty. I've often transplanted wild roses wherever I've lived.
Like Silver surfer, I would be very reluctant to identify this rose to the species level based on the information supplied by the picture. However, as i_am_jim says "there are no thorny vines" and "the leaves don't have the jagged edges" (what is also clearly visible on his picture, the serration of the leaf edge is almost nonexistent). Serrated leaves and thorny vines are two important characteristics of Rosa canina: rosa canina thorns - Bing images and Rosa canina (dog rose): Go Botany, so that much can be said that it is not R. canina. Also, according to the information on the Plants Profile for Rosa canina (dog rose) website, R. canina is absent in Texas. Not to worry, there is a lot to choose from: List of Rosa species - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :)
This picture calls it a Texas Wild Rose. Of course, this seems to just be what the person who uploaded it thinks.
Advice: In the future, if you want identification of your plant made easier and more reliable, post photos not only of the flowers but also of leaves, leaf arrangement on the stem, the growth habit of the plant, etc. Is it evergreen or deciduous, habitat it grows in . . . Another words, supply as many details as you can. That said, I am thinking your Rose may be could be a hybrid (does not have thorns, yellowish tinge to the flower) between Cherokee rose Rosa laevigata (has thorns and white flowers) and something else. cherokee rose flower cherokee rose leaf
Definitely not Rosa canina, that has pale pink flowers with much smaller petals. Looks much like the garden rose cultivar 'Nevada' (pic here) in its pale yellow flowers with large, somewhat 'floppy' petals and very few thorns.