I'm learning about Riemann-Stieltjes Integration and have a question regarding the details about the set of functions $R_{\alpha}([a,b])$.
I have read two of the following definitions for $R_{\alpha}([a,b])$ online.
$R_{\alpha}([a,b])$ denotes the collection of all $\bf{bounded}$ functions on $[a,b]$ which are Riemann-Stieltjes Integrable with respect to $\alpha$.
$R_{\alpha}([a,b]$ denotes the collection of all function on $[a,b]$ which are Riemann-Stietjes Integrable with respect to $\alpha$.
Is stating boundedness of $f \in R_{\alpha}([a,b])$ in the first definition repetitive by the definition of Upper-Riemann Sums and Lower-Riemann Sums?
$U(f,P)$ = $\sum_{i=0}^{n}M_{i}\Delta\alpha_{i}$ where $M_{i}:\sup (f(x):x_{i} \geq x \geq x_{i-1})$
$L(f:P)= \sum_{i=0}^{n}m_{i}\Delta\alpha_{i}$ where $m_{i} = \inf(f(x):x_{i} \geq x \geq x_{i-1})$
Specifically, because their definitions include the $\sup f(x)$ and $\inf f(x)$ on the intervals $[x_{i-1}, x_{i}]$. Do we implicitly assume that $f$ is bounded on $[a,b]$ to guarantee the existance of the $\sup f(x)$ and $\inf f(x)$ otherwise we couldn't define the Upper-Riemann Sum and Lower-Riemann Sum, let alone the Rienmann-Stieltjes Integral?
Also, just to follow up with the preceding question, by definition we can say $R_{\alpha}([a,b])$ $\subseteq$ $B([a,b])$ where $B([a,b])$ is the set of bounded function on the interval $[a,b]$
Thanks for the help, it's much appreciated.