Yes, that should be fine. As a detail, note that the relation should be of proportionality, not equality. That is,
\begin{equation*}
p(\alpha, \beta \, | \, r < X < r + t) \propto p(\alpha, \beta) p(r < X < r + t \, | \, \alpha, \beta).
\end{equation*}
You can use $F(x, \alpha, \beta)$ to calculate $p(r < X < r + t \, | \, \alpha, \beta)$ by way of $F(r + t, \alpha, \beta) - F(r, \alpha, \beta)$ - assuming $F$ is the cumulative distribution function as per the standard notation.
To help see that this is valid you can think of a Bernoulli random variable $Y_{r, t}$, where $Y_{r, t} = 1$ if $X$ is in the interval $(r, r+t)$ and is 0 otherwise. The standard Bernoulli probability is then described via $p(r < X < r + t)$, so you could rewrite your problem as
\begin{equation*}
p(\alpha, \beta \, | \, y_{r, t}) \propto p(\alpha, \beta) p(y_{r, t} \, | \, \alpha, \beta).
\end{equation*}
As an example you can consider a simple model like this:
\begin{align*}
\alpha, \beta & \sim \text{uniform(1, 10)} \\
X \, | \, \alpha, \beta & \sim \text{beta}(\alpha, \beta).
\end{align*}
Here's some corresponding code (pardon the Haskell); note in particular that I've defined the likelihood in terms of boundary values:
logPrior l u a b
| u < l = log 0
| a < l || b < l || a > u || b > u = log 0
| otherwise = log (density uniform a) + log (density uniform b) where
uniform = uniformDistr l u
logLikelihood ps a b = foldl' (+) 0 (fmap (log . prob) ps) where
beta = betaDistr a b
prob (r, t)
| r + t > 1 = 0
| r < 0 = 0
| otherwise = cumulative beta (r + t) - cumulative beta r
Here's the posterior, conditional on the observations
\begin{equation*}
\{(r, t)\} = \{(0.1, 0.2), (0.08, 0.21), (0.1, 0.25), (0.09, 0.18)\}
\end{equation*}
logPosterior [a, b]
| a <= 0 || b <= 0 = log 0
| otherwise = logPrior 1 10 a b + logLikelihood obs a b where
obs = [(0.1, 0.2), (0.08, 0.21), (0.1, 0.25), (0.09, 0.18)]
and we can collect some samples over the posterior parameter space via whatever method you have available (I've used a simple Metropolis sampler below):
For a different set of observations, say
\begin{equation*}
\{(r, t)\} = \{(0.5, 0.2), (0.48, 0.21), (0.5, 0.25), (0.49, 0.18)\}
\end{equation*}
you of course get a different posterior: