Hi,
First of all, I am aware that my English is not the best, and I would like to excuse myself if I ever sound harsh, hard-stanced or garbled... That happens a lot :)... Please, take anything I write with a big 'ESL' tag in front of it. :) Also, feel free to flame me anytime. Thank you. 
The main issue I see with this is that there are many more than two
roles that visitors to the Inkscape website might fall into. So
instead of imagining *roles* I think it makes more sense to imagine
specific *goals* a user might have in mind when they come to the site.
The distinction is perhaps minor, and often the two might seem to
align. But certain goals will be common across various roles, and it
probably makes sense to keep those together. When these goals overlap,
the page/section should focus on either the most common, or on the
user who is likely to be least familiar with Inkscape.
Yes, you are right! A 'Goal' and relations you mentioned describe this purpose very well. I've used the word 'role' since it is a humanistic term, and 'goal' is marketing/branding term. I aggree that 'goals' are an essential part of any 'role'. The other word we could use is 'persona', in the communication studies sense, but there is also a 'persona' in marketing, which is not quite the meaning I would like to communicate.
'Role... it is an expected or free or continuously changing behavior and may have a given individual social status or social position.' -Wikipedia

*Excuse me for using 'role' instead of 'goals' and bringing in some confusion all the time. When talking about 'open-source' paradigm, I tend to use humanistic terms to make a distinction from 'market and marketing' paradigms. for example...
Marketing jargon: target, goal, consumer, persona...
Roughly corresponding humanistic terms: need, purpose, person, role...
The 'Open source market' sounds like an etymological oxymoron. I might be wrong, but 'Open-source economy' on the other hand, seems to work fine...
But, you should see me talking to the clients LOL.

In any case, I have a feeling we are talking about the same thing. :) Both Dev and User 'goals' or 'roles' in many cases are in one person. 


Naturally, different parts of the website will end up being more
user-focused or more developer-focused, and with the right menu names
& structure this should be clear.
Yes! This path! The right menu (section) names & structure, and I would add 'proper visual communication', but you are a master in that field. ;).


 But it sounds like you might be
looking to define two explicit sections or 'modes' on the site? I
don't think that is the best approach - let me know if I'm not
understanding this correctly.
No, no, no! (Heh, I sound like my granny :))...
No explicit sections or modes. But more like the approach you mentioned above. I'm sorry if it seemed like sections...


It's also important to remember that inkscape.org is only one part of
the community...
True, I let that out of sight. :( That was my stupid oversight. The community is much wider.

Your suggestions about showing off Inkscape as a powerful tool with
quality examples are important, and this is what newcomers to the site
will see. But I think its also fine to show the development community
aspects as well, even if the user is only interested in using Inkscape
and not getting involved.
Yes, of course. In the messages before, I tried to strongly emphasize that Developer and User roles are just sides of One Inkscape community. They are not two individual characters, they are only aspects. User role represents the 'goals' connected to using Inkscape, Developer role represents the 'goals' connected to creating Inkscape. I am sorry if it did not come through clearly. ESL! :)
...

I cannot claim the validity since it is an unfinished research, but as it seems to me, this happens a lot:
-Those who are able to masterfully use some FLOSS application, often do not contribute FLOSS projects because they feel that: 'they cannot code, it takes a lot of time, don't have good social skills, etc.'
-Those who are able to masterfully create applications often don't contribute to a FLOSS project because: 'it's not their 'itch', don't see it's purpose or vision, etc.'
-in the extreme cases, users treat a FLOSS project like a free (beer) alternative to something else; or the developers treat it as a tribal territory/group belonging thing.
-it was also observed that well presented projects seem to attract both Developers and Users. Inkscape, thanks to it's amazing community, is here, I think.

To be honest, (marketing mode> ON) the idea behind the suggestion of 'role' or 'goals' based approach to the website information structure was to 'lure' more of both Devs and Users for the benefit of Inkscape project by providing comfy information environment. (Not sure if the way I formulated it was any good).
-You don't even have to know how to submit a bug, and still be a contributor to the project. The untapped power of the users is the immense amount of feedback they create. A managed approach to that feedback gives a wealth of data that can positively influence the development. Mozilla with Aza Raskin do that beautifully. I feel that it would be good to implement this aspect here, too.
...
I admire the work you girls and guys are doing at the developmentseed! It is obvious to me that you are the Masters and that the things written here might be trivial to you. Sorry 'bout that! :) I would not like to impede the new website in any way. I type all of this in an effort to have an open-mind and to follow the 'bazaar' instead of 'cathedral' approach, that we designers tend to do. ;)... And, to hopefully induce (or provoke?) more ideas from more people.

Cheers!

Alex