<p>Probably better suited for Stackoverflow but I think its still a valid question for this SE.</p>

<p>Producing theora(ogg) versions of your videos is actually redundant. Any browser version supporting ogg is also supporting webm.</p>

<p>For questions like these I recommend using <a href="http://caniuse.com" rel="nofollow">caniuse.com</a>.
If you compare <a href="http://caniuse.com/webm" rel="nofollow">webm</a> with <a href="http://caniuse.com/ogv" rel="nofollow">ogg</a> you quickly see that you cover the same browser versions and more with webm.
Unless you need to cover Firefox 3.5+.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-07-28T22:15:31.747Z
Thanks much -- I'm new to the ogg/webm stuff, but that's pretty much what I thought was going on.
Jim Miller
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-07-28T22:10:14.533Z
2014-07-28T22:10:14.533Z
timonsku
<p>I'm doing some HTML5 video work; I'm taking uploaded video and using ffmpeg and related packages to convert the original videos (usually .mov, but whatever) into mp4, ogg and webm versions for presentation via video.js.  The ogg and webm encodings are both working nicely in Firefox across Windows, Mac, and Linux (the main reason for producing both, it seems); my question is whether, as a practical matter, I need to produce both ogg and webm versions.  Both seem to be working well; I'm asking out of an interest in not producing stuff that I don't really need.  Any thoughts?  Thanks!</p>

<video><file-formats><webvideos><video-standards>
Do I need to encode video in both ogg and webm?
Jim Miller
# Do I need to encode video in both ogg and webm?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-07-28)

I'm doing some HTML5 video work; I'm taking uploaded video and using ffmpeg and related packages to convert the original videos (usually .mov, but whatever) into mp4, ogg and webm versions for presentation via video.js. The ogg and webm encodings are both working nicely in Firefox across Windows, Mac, and Linux (the main reason for producing both, it seems); my question is whether, as a practical matter, I need to produce both ogg and webm versions. Both seem to be working well; I'm asking out of an interest in not producing stuff that I don't really need. Any thoughts? Thanks!

**Tags:** video, file-formats, webvideos, video-standards


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2014-07-28. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

Probably better suited for Stackoverflow but I think its still a valid question for this SE.

Producing theora(ogg) versions of your videos is actually redundant. Any browser version supporting ogg is also supporting webm.

For questions like these I recommend using [caniuse.com](http://caniuse.com).
If you compare [webm](http://caniuse.com/webm) with [ogg](http://caniuse.com/ogv) you quickly see that you cover the same browser versions and more with webm.
Unless you need to cover Firefox 3.5+.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks much -- I'm new to the ogg/webm stuff, but that's pretty much what I thought was going on.  

---

