The way how WebP images are server (general disc.)

Hello,

I am using
WebP Express
On websites that servers support modules required.

On other websites I am using
EWWW Image Optimizer
Where servers does not support modules required by WebP Express

Both plugins are great and doing its job.

One difference is how images are served.

WebP amending content header to server WebP images.
Hence correct WebP images are served in supported browser but images/links still remain as original.
i.e: image.jpg (but served correctly as WebP) – working, no issue with that.
WebP Images are saved in designated location (but not along with original files)

EWWW is converting JPG image and saving WEBP copy along side.
When image is served in WebP it got added extension .webp on the end
i.e. image.jpg.web – no issue in that.

My question is, from SEO point of view, etc.
Do you think is better is to server images in their original url, with original extension with amendment of header to serve WebP,
Or,
To do, as EWWW is doing, server with amended url and added .webp on the end of file?

Both working, bot giving good results on GTmetrix etc (both showing Image optimisation on 100% – Grade A).

ps. I ask this question on support forum for both plugins, hope to gather feedback from two fronts.